Abdelmguid v. Kelly, 4:17-cv-0340-KOB-JEO. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. Alabama
Number: infdco20180406943
Visitors: 10
Filed: Apr. 05, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 05, 2018
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION KARON OWEN BOWDRE , Chief District Judge . This is a habeas corpus action under 28 U.S.C. 2241, filed by Petitioner Ahmed Alaa Abdelmguid, pro se. Petitioner challenges the legality of his continued detention by federal immigration authorities pending his removal from the United States under the Immigration and Nationality Act. ( See Doc.1). Respondents have moved to dismiss the action as moot, on the ground that Petitioner has been removed from the United States. (
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION KARON OWEN BOWDRE , Chief District Judge . This is a habeas corpus action under 28 U.S.C. 2241, filed by Petitioner Ahmed Alaa Abdelmguid, pro se. Petitioner challenges the legality of his continued detention by federal immigration authorities pending his removal from the United States under the Immigration and Nationality Act. ( See Doc.1). Respondents have moved to dismiss the action as moot, on the ground that Petitioner has been removed from the United States. (D..
More
MEMORANDUM OPINION
KARON OWEN BOWDRE, Chief District Judge.
This is a habeas corpus action under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, filed by Petitioner Ahmed Alaa Abdelmguid, pro se. Petitioner challenges the legality of his continued detention by federal immigration authorities pending his removal from the United States under the Immigration and Nationality Act. (See Doc.1). Respondents have moved to dismiss the action as moot, on the ground that Petitioner has been removed from the United States. (Doc. 13).
Respondents' motion is supported by a declaration by a Supervisory Detention and Deportation Officer who states that Petitioner was removed from the United States on March 27, 2018. (Doc. 13-1). As a result, Petitioner's habeas corpus claim for release under an order of supervision or for repatriation is moot because the court can no longer provide meaningful relief. See Nyaga v. Ashcroft, 323 F.3d 906, 913 (11th Cir. 2003). Respondents' motion is due to be granted and this action is due to be dismissed. A separate Final Order will be entered.
DONE and ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
