Torres-Govea v. ICE Field Office Dir.

Full title: VICTOR TORRES-GOVEA, Petitioner, v. ICE FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, Respondent.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

Date published: Mar 3, 2020

Case No. C19-1722-RAJ-MLP (W.D. Wash. Mar. 3, 2020)

Opinion

Case No. C19-1722-RAJ-MLP

03-03-2020

VICTOR TORRES-GOVEA, Petitioner, v. ICE FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, Respondent.

MICHELLE L. PETERSON United States Magistrate Judge

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Petitioner initiated this 28 U.S.C. § 2241 immigration habeas action pro se to obtain release from detention or a bond hearing. (Dkt. # 3.) The Government moved to dismiss. (Dkt. # 6.) Petitioner was subsequently removed pursuant to a final order of removal. (Dkt. ## 11-1, 11-2.) Accordingly, the Government now asks the Court to dismiss this action as moot. (Dkt. # 11.)

Under Article III of the U.S. Constitution, federal courts may adjudicate only actual, ongoing cases or controversies. Deakins v. Monaghan, 484 U.S. 193, 199 (1988). "For a habeas petition to continue to present a live controversy after the petitioner's release or deportation . . . there must be some remaining 'collateral consequence' that may be redressed by success on the petition." Abdala v. I.N.S., 488 F.3d 1061, 1064 (9th Cir. 2007). Because Petitioner's habeas petition seeks only release from detention, his claims have been fully resolved by his removal. See id. at 1065. Accordingly, there is no collateral consequence that could be redressed by the Court, and Petitioner's habeas petition should be dismissed as moot. See id.

The Court thus recommends that the Government's motion to dismiss (dkt. # 6) be GRANTED, Petitioner's habeas petition be DENIED, and this action be DISMISSED without prejudice. A proposed order accompanies this Report and Recommendation.

Objections to this Report and Recommendation, if any, should be filed with the Clerk and served upon all parties to this suit within twenty-one (21) days of the date on which this Report and Recommendation is signed. Failure to file objections within the specified time may affect your right to appeal. Objections should be noted for consideration on the District Judge's motions calendar for the third Friday after they are filed. Responses to objections may be filed within fourteen (14) days after service of objections. If no timely objections are filed, the matter will be ready for consideration by the District Judge on March 27, 2020.

Dated this 3rd day of March, 2020.

/s/_________

MICHELLE L. PETERSON

United States Magistrate Judge