ORDER and REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CHARLES A. STAMPELOS, Magistrate Judge.

Petitioner, proceeding pro se, filed a second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. ECF No. 10. Petitioner is a native of the Bahamas who was ordered removed from the United States on September 7, 2016. He was taken into ICE custody on August 19, 2016. Id. Petitioner asserted that ICE is unable to obtain travel documents because neither the Bahamas nor the Turks and Caicos would accept him, and he sought release from detention pursuant to Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 121 S.Ct. 2491, 150 L.Ed.2d 653 (2001). Id.

Respondents have now filed a motion to dismiss the petition on the basis that Petitioner was released from confinement. ECF No. 17. Because Petitioner only sought release from an alleged period of indefinite detention under Zadvydas, and because he is no longer "in custody," Respondents seeks dismissal on the basis that Petitioner has already been granted the relief sought in the petition and, thus, the petition is moot. Good cause having been shown, the motion should be granted.

Attached to Respondent's motion to dismiss, ECF No. 17 is the Order of Supervision which provides an address for Petitioner upon his release: 20134 N.W. 12th Place, Miami, FL 33169. ECF No. 17-1 at 3. The Clerk of Court shall provide a copy of this Report and Recommendation to Petitioner at that location.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Clerk of Court provide this Report and Recommendation to Petitioner at his address of record and to his address upon release: 20134 N.W. 12th Place, Miami, FL 33169.

RECOMMENDATION

Because Petitioner has been released from detention, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that the § 2241 petition filed by Shanto Shavago Curry be DISMISSED as moot.

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation, a party may serve and file specific written objections to these proposed findings and recommendations. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). A copy of the objections shall be served upon all other parties. A party may respond to another party's objections within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Any different deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the Court's internal use only and does not control. If a party fails to object to the Magistrate Judge's findings or recommendations as to any particular claim or issue contained in this Report and Recommendation, that party waives the right to challenge on appeal the District Court's order based on the unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.