Qalinle v. Donahue

Filing 15

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)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Abdihakiin Ahmed Qalinle, Petitioner, 10 11 ORDER v. 12 No. CV-15-02190-PHX-DJH Michael Donahue, 13 Respondent. 14 15 This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 for 16 a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody (Doc. 1), and the Report and 17 Recommendation (“R&R”) issued on January 29, 2016, by United States Magistrate 18 Judge Bridget S. Bade (Doc. 14). 19 During the pendency of the Petition, Respondent notified the Court that on 20 November 6, 2015, Petitioner had been released from the custody of the United States 21 Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") agency. (Doc. 14 at 2:7-8) (citation 22 omitted). After Respondent filed a Notice to Court and Suggestion of Mootness based 23 upon Petitioner's release from ICE custody, the Magistrate Judge issued an Order to 24 Show Cause, requiring Petitioner to file a response thereto showing why his Petition 25 should not be dismissed as moot. (Id. at 2:10-12) (citation and footnote omitted). 26 Doc. 16. When Petitioner did not respond, and because Petitioner had been granted the 27 relief he sought in his Petition, the Magistrate Judge soundly reasoned that his release 28 mooted the Petition. (Id. at 2:15-3:20). See On this basis, the Magistrate Judge 1 recommended denying the Petition as moot. (Id. at 3:23-24). 2 The parties have not filed objections and the time to do so has expired. Absent 3 any objections, the Court is not required to review the findings and recommendations in 4 the R&R. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1989) (The relevant provision of the 5 Federal Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), “does not on its face require any 6 review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.”); United States v. 7 Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (same); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3) (“The 8 district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that 9 has been properly objected to.”). 10 Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the R&R and agrees with its 11 recommendation. The Court will, therefore, accept the R&R, and deny the Petition as 12 moot. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (“A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, 13 in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”); 14 Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3) (same). 15 Accordingly, 16 IT IS ORDERED ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING as an Order of this Court 17 18 19 20 21 22 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. 23 24 25 26 Honorable Diane J. Humetewa United States District Judge 27 28 -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?