(HC) Singh v. Chestnut et al

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JAGROOP SINGH,
Petitioner,
v.
CHRISTOPHER CHESTNUT, et al.,
Respondents.
No. 1:26-cv-00028 JLT EPG (HC)
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS, GRANTING
PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS
CORPUS, DENYING PETITIONER’S
MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION AS MOOT, DENYING
RESPONDENTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS,
ORDERING RESPONDENTS TO
IMMEDIATELY RELEASE PETITIONER,
AND DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO
CLOSE CASE
(Docs. 1, 2, 10, 12)
Petitioner is an immigration detainee proceeding with a petition for writ of habeas corpus
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On January 27, 2026,1 the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations
recommending that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be granted on Count Two, Petitioner’s
motion for preliminary injunction be denied as moot, Respondents’ motion to dismiss be denied,
and Respondents be directed to immediately release Petitioner. (Doc. 12.) On February 10, 2026,
Respondents filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (Doc. 14.)
/////
1 The findings and recommendations were signed on January 26, 2026, but not docketed until January 27, 2026.
Case 1:26-cv-00028-JLT-EPG Document 15 Filed 02/23/26 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of the
case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Respondents’ objections, the Court
concludes the findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.
Thus, the Court ORDERS:
1. The findings and recommendations issued on January 27, 2026 (Doc. 12) are
ADOPTED IN FULL.
2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) is GRANTED on Count Two.
3. Petitioner’s motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. 2) is DENIED as moot.
4. Respondents’ motion to dismiss (Doc. 10) is DENIED.
5. Respondents are ordered to IMMEDIATELY RELEASE Petitioner on the
conditions of his prior release from custody until DHS proves to a neutral adjudicator
by clear and convincing evidence that re-detention is necessary to prevent danger to
the community or flight or to effectuate a final and executable order of removal.
6. Respondents are ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-detaining Petitioner
absent compliance with constitutional protections, which include at a minimum,
predeprivation notice2 of at least seven days before a predeprivation hearing at which
the government will bear the burden of demonstrating by clear and convincing
evidence that he is likely to flee or pose a danger to the community if not arrested.
7. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE THE CASE.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 21, 2026
2 If legally sufficient circumstances justify arrest without notice in advance, a post-deprivation hearing consistent
with the requirements set forth here, SHALL be provided within seven days of the arrest.
Case 1:26-cv-00028-JLT-EPG Document 15 Filed 02/23/26 Page 2 of 2