Genao v. Winn
ORDER that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 21 ) is hereby ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as the findings of fact and conclusions of law by this Court. It is further Ordered that Respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (Doc. 19 ) in GRANTED. It is further Ordered that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1 ) is DENIED as moot and this action is hereby DISMISSED. Signed by Senior Judge Frank R Zapata on 8/12/2015. (MFR)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Warden J.T. Shartle,1
Before the Court for consideration is a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus,
brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 by pro se Petitioner Ismael Genao, and the Report
and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge recommending that the Court enter an
order granting Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction.
This matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Leslie A. Bowman, pursuant to the
provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), Rule 72, Fed.R.Civ.P., and Local Rules 72.1 and 72.2
of the Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, for
further proceedings and Report and Recommendation.
Magistrate Judge Bowman issued her Report and Recommendation on July 13,
2015, recommending that the Court grant Respondent’s motion to dismiss and enter an
order denying the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus as moot.
The Report and Recommendation sets forth the factual and procedural background
relevant to this action and a legal analysis addressing the lack of case and controversy.
Substituted for former Warden Louis W. Winn, Jr. pursuant to Rule 25(d),
Petitioner filed his federal habeas petition on October 6, 2014. (Doc. 1) The
Court’s screening Order, filed April 1, 2015, ordered Respondent to file an answer to the
petition. (Doc. 11) Petitioner was released from the custody of the Federal Bureau of
Prisons on April 10, 2015. (Doc. 19-1) Respondent filed the present Motion to Dismiss
for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction on May 27, 2015. (Doc. 19) All notices and filing
have been returned as undeliverable to Petitioner following his release. No response in
opposition to the motion to dismiss was filed.
The parties were advised that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
72(b)(2), any party may serve and file written objections within fourteen days of being
served with a copy of the Report and Recommendation, and that a party may respond to
the other party’s objections within fourteen days. No objections were filed.
The Court finds, after consideration of all matters presented and an independent
review of the record herein, that the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus shall be denied
and this action shall be dismissed in accordance with the Report and Recommendation.
Based on the foregoing,
IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 21) is hereby
ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as the findings of fact and conclusions of law by this Court;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of
Subject Matter Jurisdiction (Doc. 19) in GRANTED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1)
is DENIED as moot and this action is hereby DISMISSED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment
Dated this 12th day of August, 2015.
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?