JONES v. MULLEN

Filing 12

MEMORANDUM ORDER. Petitioner Brian Jones's Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED AS MOOT. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation 10 is adopted as the Opinion of the District Court. Signed by Judge Cathy Bissoon on 2/14/18. (rdl)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA BRIAN JONES, Petitioner, v. SHERIFF WILLIAM P. MULLEN, et al., Respondents. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 17-1366 Judge Cathy Bissoon Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly MEMORANDUM ORDER This case has been referred to United States Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 636 and Local Rule of Civil Procedure 72. On December 8, 2017, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report (Doc. 10) recommending that Petitioner Brian Jones’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1), be dismissed as moot because Petitioner challenged his pre-trial custody but has since been convicted and released from custody. The Report was served on the parties, and no objections have been filed.1 After a de novo review of the pleadings and documents in this case and the Magistrate Judge’s Report, the Court concurs with the recommendation. Accordingly, the following Order is entered: The Petition (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED AS MOOT. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is hereby adopted as the Opinion of the District Court. 1 For registered ECF users, objections were due by December 22, 2017; for unregistered ECF users, objections were due by December 26, 2017. (See Doc. 10.) IT IS SO ORDERED. February 14, 2018 cc (via ECF email notification): All counsel of record cc (via First-Class, U.S. Mail): BRIAN JONES 307 North Avenue East Pittsburgh, PA 15112 s/Cathy Bissoon Cathy Bissoon 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?