Chen v. Crowler et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 21 of the Magistrate Judge as the order of this Court. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied as moot. The Clerk shall enter judgment. Signed by Judge Susan R Bolton on 2/9/10. (LSP)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 vs. Kip Crowler, et al. Respondents. Feng Chen, Petitioner,
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
No. CV08-1922-PHX-SRB ORDER
Petitioner, Feng Chen, filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on October 20, 2008. On January 20, 2009, Respondents filed their response to the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Petitioner filed his reply on February 6, 2009. On January 19, 2010, Respondents filed a Notice to the Court and Suggestion of Mootness advising the Court that Petitioner was released on March 10, 2009. The Magistrate Judge filed his Report and Recommendation on January 22, 2010 recommending that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be denied as moot. In his Report and Recommendation the Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had 14 days from the date of service of a copy of the Report and Recommendation within which to file specific written objections with the Court. The time to file such objections has expired and no objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
The Court finds itself in agreement with the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as the order of this Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly.
DATED this 9th day of February, 2010.
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?