From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Liang v. Lowe

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Sep 27, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-1735 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 27, 2018)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-1735

09-27-2018

LIANFU LIANG, Petitioner v. CRAIG A. LOWE, et al., Respondent


( ) ORDER

AND NOW, this 27th day of September, 2018, upon consideration of the petition (Doc. 1) for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 by petitioner Lianfu Liang ("Liang"), wherein Liang contends that he has been subject to pre-removal or pre-final order detention by Immigration and Customs Enforcement for an unreasonably long period of time and requests immediate release on bond and a bond hearing performed by this court, and further upon consideration of the report (Doc. 27) of Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick, recommending that the court dismiss Liang's petition as moot because his custodial status has since shifted, (see id. at 7-8), and it appearing that no party has objected to the report, see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and the court noting that failure of a party to timely object to a magistrate judge's conclusions "may result in forfeiture of de novo review at the district court level," Nara v. Frank, 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007) (citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878-79 (3d Cir. 1987)), but that, as a matter of good practice, a district court should "afford some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report," Henderson, 812 F.2d 878; see also Taylor v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 83 F. Supp. 3d 625, 626 (M.D. Pa. 2015) (citing Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Int'l, Inc., 702 F. Supp. 2d 465, 469 (M.D. Pa. 2010)), in order to "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record," FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b) advisory committee notes, and, following an independent review of the record, the court being in agreement with Judge Mehalchick's recommendation, and concluding that there is no clear error on the face of the record, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. The report (Doc. 27) of Magistrate Judge Mehalchick is ADOPTED.

2. Liang's petition (Doc. 1) for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and his motion (Doc. 4) to expedite are DISMISSED as moot.

3. The court finds no basis to issue a certificate of appealability. See R. GOVERNING SECTION 2254 CASES R. 11(a).

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER

Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge

United States District Court

Middle District of Pennsylvania


Summaries of

Liang v. Lowe

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Sep 27, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-1735 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 27, 2018)
Case details for

Liang v. Lowe

Case Details

Full title:LIANFU LIANG, Petitioner v. CRAIG A. LOWE, et al., Respondent

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Sep 27, 2018

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-1735 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 27, 2018)