Opinion
Case No. 2:20-cv-01914-RGK-MAA
12-11-2020
KYLE EVAN PETERSEN, Petitioner, v. P. BRADLEY, Warden, Respondent.
ORDER DISMISSING PETITION AS MOOT AND DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE; DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
On February 27, 2020, Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 ("Section 2241") ("Petition"). (Pet., ECF No. 1.) Petitioner raises one claim for Section 2241 relief: that the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") exceeded its authority in placing him at the United States Penitentiary in Lompoc, California ("USP-Lompoc"). (Pet. 2-3.) He states that prison staff members in the psychiatric unit told him that he would not be safe in the prison yard at USP-Lompoc because the inmates there have a policy of assaulting sexual offenders. (Id. at 3.)
Pinpoint citations in this Order refer to the page numbers appearing in the ECF-generated headers of the parties' filings.
On April 24, 2020, Respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss the Petition, including a Memorandum of Points and Authorities, and supporting Exhibits. (Mot. to Dismiss, ECF No. 13; Exs., ECF No. 13-1.) On July 15, 2020, Petitioner filed an Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss. (Opp'n, ECF No. 19.)
On September 1, 2020, the Magistrate Judge assigned to this action issued a Report and Recommendation recommending granting the Motion to Dismiss and dismissing the Petition without prejudice on the ground that the BOP's discretionary determination to place Petitioner at USP-Lompoc is not subject to judicial review. (Rep. & Recommendation, ECF No. 21.)
However, on October 1, 2020, the Magistrate Judge issued an order withdrawing the Report and Recommendation and ordering Petitioner to show cause by no later than November 23, 2020 why the Petition should not be dismissed as moot in light of Petitioner's transfer from USP-Lompoc to a different BOP facility. (Order to Show Cause ("OSC"), ECF No. 24.) To date, Petitioner has not filed a response to this OSC.
The Court sent a courtesy copy of this Order to Show Cause to Petitioner's new address at FCI Pollock Federal Correctional Institution. (See OSC 2-3; see also Notice of Change of Address, ECF No. 26.) --------
II. DISCUSSION
Federal courts are barred from hearing matters in the absence of a live case or controversy. See U.S. Const. art. III, § 2; Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998). To meet the case or controversy requirement of Article III, the parties must continue to have a personal stake in the outcome of the lawsuit throughout the proceedings. Wilson v. Terhune, 319 F.3d 477, 479 (9th Cir. 2003). "If an event occurs that prevents the court from granting effective relief, the claim is moot and must be dismissed." Am. Rivers v. Nat'l Marine Fisheries Serv., 126 F.3d 1118, 1123 (9th Cir. 1997).
In this case, Petitioner challenged his placement at USP-Lompoc, alleging that he was likely to be assaulted by other prisoners at that facility on account of his status as a sexual offender. (Pet. 2-3; Opp'n 3-7.) Petitioner has not challenged his new placement or raised any allegations regarding a risk of assault at FCI-Pollock, nor has he filed any response to the Court's OSC. Thus, by transferring Petitioner to FCI-Pollock, the BOP already has granted Petitioner the relief sought in the Petition, and it is now "impossible for the [C]ourt to grant any effectual relief whatever." Church of Scientology of Cal. v. United States, 506 U.S. 9, 12 (1992) (citation and quotation marks omitted).
IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that the Petition is DISMISSED as moot and this Action is DISMISSED without prejudice. In light of this dismissal, it is further ORDERED that Respondent's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as moot. DATED: December 11, 2020
/s/_________
R. GARY KLAUSNER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Presented by: /s/_________
MARIA A. AUDERO
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE