Singh v. Holder et al

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge William M Acker, Jr on 11/1/13. (SAC )

Download PDF
FILED 2013 Nov-01 PM 02:35 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA MIDDLE DIVISION MANDEEP SINGH, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Petitioner, v. ERIC HOLDER, JR., ET AL., Respondents. 4:12-cv-2621-WMA-PWG MEMORANDUM OPINION Before the court is the Motion to Dismiss as Moot (Doc. # 3) filed by Respondents on August 29, 2013. In their motion, Respondents note that on August 15, 2013, Petitioner, Mandeep Singh (“Singh”), was released from the custody of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) pursuant to an Order of Supervision. (Doc. # 3-1). Respondents argue that, because Singh has been released on an Order of Supervision, this case is due to be dismissed as moot. On August 3, 2012, Singh filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, alleging that he was being illegally detained by ICE pending his deportation to India, and seeking to be released from custody. (Doc. # 1). Because Singh has been released on an Order of Supervision, his petition seeking that very relief is moot. See Nyaga v. Ashcroft, 323 F.3d 906, 913 (11th Cir. 2003) (“a case must be dismissed as moot if the court can no longer provide ‘meaningful relief’”); see also Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 8 (1998) (once a habeas petitioner is released from custody, he must demonstrate collateral consequences to avoid mootness doctrine). Accordingly, Respondents’ motion will be granted and this matter will be dismissed. Khader v. Holder, 843 F. Supp. 2d 1202 (N.D. Ala. 2011). A separate order effectuating this opinion will be entered. DONE this 1st day of November, 2013. _____________________________ WILLIAM M. ACKER, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?