Gomez v. Cheron, 3:18cv237-DPJ-FKB. (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. Mississippi
Number: infdco20190506480
Visitors: 14
Filed: Apr. 15, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 15, 2019
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION F. KEITH BALL , Magistrate Judge . Enrique Villa Gomez filed this action on April 16, 2018, while he was a federal inmate incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Complex at Yazoo City, Mississippi. In his petition, he challenged the Bureau of Prison's calculation of his sentence. The website of the Federal Bureau of Prisons indicates that Petitioner was released from custody on July 9, 2018. Thus, his petition is now moot. The undersigned recommends that the peti
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION F. KEITH BALL , Magistrate Judge . Enrique Villa Gomez filed this action on April 16, 2018, while he was a federal inmate incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Complex at Yazoo City, Mississippi. In his petition, he challenged the Bureau of Prison's calculation of his sentence. The website of the Federal Bureau of Prisons indicates that Petitioner was released from custody on July 9, 2018. Thus, his petition is now moot. The undersigned recommends that the petit..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
F. KEITH BALL, Magistrate Judge.
Enrique Villa Gomez filed this action on April 16, 2018, while he was a federal inmate incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Complex at Yazoo City, Mississippi. In his petition, he challenged the Bureau of Prison's calculation of his sentence. The website of the Federal Bureau of Prisons indicates that Petitioner was released from custody on July 9, 2018. Thus, his petition is now moot. The undersigned recommends that the petition be dismissed.
The parties are hereby notified that failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation contained within this report and recommendation within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court. 28 U.S.C. § 636; Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Douglass v. United Services Automobile Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428-29 (5th Cir. 1996).
Source: Leagle
