Binh v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Madeline Hughes Haikala on 9/12/2018. (KEK)
FILED
2018 Sep-12 AM 11:52
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
MIDDLE DIVISION
NGUYEN VO BINH,
Petitioner,
v.
IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS
ENFORCEMENT,
Respondent.
}
}
}
}
} Case No.: 4:18-cv-1223-MHH-TMP
}
}
}
}
}
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This action is before the Court on the respondent’s August 27, 2018 motion
to dismiss. (Doc. 4). On August 3, 2018, Mr. Binh filed a petition for writ of
habeas corpus seeking his release from custody. (Doc. 1).
In its motion, the
respondent contends that the Court should dismiss Mr. Binh’s § 2241 habeas
petition because United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement released
Mr. Binh on August 22, 2018. (Doc. 4-1, Pitman Decl.).
Because Mr. Binh 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, by separate order, the
Court will dismiss this matter. Khader v. Holder, 843 F. Supp. 2d 1202 (N.D. Ala.
2011).
DONE this 12th day of September, 2018.
_________________________________
MADELINE HUGHES HAIKALA
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?