Qalinle v. Donahue
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: accepting and adopting as an Order of this Court Magistrate Judge Bade's 14 Report and Recommendation; denying as moot the Petition Under 28 U.S.C. 2241 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody 1 ; the Clerk shall terminate this action and enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Diane J Humetewa on 2/18/16. (REW)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Abdihakiin Ahmed Qalinle,
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 for
a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody (Doc. 1), and the Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) issued on January 29, 2016, by United States Magistrate
Judge Bridget S. Bade (Doc. 14).
During the pendency of the Petition, Respondent notified the Court that on
November 6, 2015, Petitioner had been released from the custody of the United States
Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") agency. (Doc. 14 at 2:7-8) (citation
omitted). After Respondent filed a Notice to Court and Suggestion of Mootness based
upon Petitioner's release from ICE custody, the Magistrate Judge issued an Order to
Show Cause, requiring Petitioner to file a response thereto showing why his Petition
should not be dismissed as moot. (Id. at 2:10-12) (citation and footnote omitted).
Doc. 16. When Petitioner did not respond, and because Petitioner had been granted the
relief he sought in his Petition, the Magistrate Judge soundly reasoned that his release
mooted the Petition.
(Id. at 2:15-3:20).
On this basis, the Magistrate Judge
recommended denying the Petition as moot. (Id. at 3:23-24).
The parties have not filed objections and the time to do so has expired. Absent
any objections, the Court is not required to review the findings and recommendations in
the R&R. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1989) (The relevant provision of the
Federal Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), “does not on its face require any
review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.”); United States v.
Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (same); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3) (“The
district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that
has been properly objected to.”).
Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the R&R and agrees with its
recommendation. The Court will, therefore, accept the R&R, and deny the Petition as
moot. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (“A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify,
in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”);
Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3) (same).
IT IS ORDERED ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING as an Order of this Court
Magistrate Judge Bade’s R&R (Doc. 14);
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING as moot the Petition Under 28 U.S.C.
2241 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody (Doc. 1); and
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action
and enter judgment accordingly.
Dated this 18th day of February, 2016.
Honorable Diane J. Humetewa
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?