Case ID: f-appx_21/html/0103-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Robert E. VIRGIL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Juan CAMPOS, Officer in Charge, Immigration and Naturalization Service; John Ashcroft, United States Attorney General, Respondents-Appellees.
    No. 01-6697.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 28, 2001.
    Decided Oct. 15, 2001.
    Robert E. Virgil, pro se.
    Anh Thu P. Mai, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for appellees.
    Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994), Robert E. Virgil filed this petition for habeas corpus relief in the district court, asking that he be considered for relief under § 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c) (1994; repealed 1996). The district court ordered the Board of Immigration Appeals to reconsider Virgil’s application in light of Tasios v. INS, 204 F.3d 544 (4th Cir.2000), and 8 C.F.R. § 3.44 (2000). See also INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 121 S.Ct. 2271, 150 L.Ed.2d 347 (2001). Virgil appealed the district court’s order. The Government now suggests that the appeal is moot, in view of the fact that Virgil has received the relief he sought: consideration before the immigration judge of his § 212(c) application, and a bond reduction. Having reviewed the case thoroughly, we agree that the appeal is moot. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998) (throughout the litigation the plaintiff must have an actual injury likely to be redressed by a favorable decision of the court). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.