Ukwu v. Holder et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge C Lynwood Smith, Jr on 5/24/2012. (AHI)
2012 May-24 AM 10:18
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
ERIC HOLDER, et al.,
Civil Action Number
Sunday Ukwu, presently a detainee of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (“ICE”) confined at the Etowah County Detention Center in Gadsden,
Alabama, filed this pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241. (Doc. 1). The Board of Immigration Appeals has ordered Ukwu removed to
the Nigeria, and he is challenging his detention at the center beyond the removal
period pursuant to Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). After Ukwu filed the
petition, ICE obtained the requisite travel documents to return Ukwu to Nigeria and
a ticket on a commercial flight to Lagos, Nigeria, for Ukwu. (Doc. 18). However,
Ukwu refused to board the commercial flight, causing respondents to move to dismiss
the petition pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(1)(C). (Id.) On April 26, 2012, the
magistrate judge assigned this case issued a Report and Recommendation, finding
that respondents’ motion is due to be granted in light of Ukwu’s lack of cooperation
with the removal proceedings. (Doc. 19). To date, the petitioner has not filed any
objections to the Report and Recommendation.
Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court
file, the court is of the opinion that the magistrate judge’s report is due to be adopted
The court hereby adopts and approves the findings and
recommendation of the magistrate judge as the findings and conclusions of the court.
Accordingly, respondents’ motion to dismiss (doc. 18) is due to be granted, and the
petition dismissed with prejudice. An appropriate order will be entered.
DONE this 24th day of May, 2012.
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?