Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00224/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00224-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 463
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Movahhed Danial, 

Petitioner,

vs.

Katrina Kane, ICE, Dept. of Homeland

Security, 

Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 08-224–PHX-PGR (JCG)

REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

On February 4, 2008, Petitioner Movahhed Danial filed a pro se Petition for Writ of

Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 alleging that immigration officials were holding

him in detention pending his removal to Iran, but that his removal could not be effected.

Petitioner sought his immediate release from custody on the grounds that his indefinite

detention with no prospect that his removal would be effected in the reasonably foreseeable

future was not authorized by law. See Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001) (when there

is no reasonable likelihood that a foreign government will accept the alien's return in the

reasonably foreseeable future, the immigration laws do not permit the INS to detain the alien

indefinitely; rather, the INS has the authority to detain aliens only for a reasonable time

beyond the normal 90-day statutory removal period).

On May 7, 2008, Respondent filed a Suggestion of Mootness (Doc. No. 7) indicating

that Petitioner was released under an Order of Supervision on April 15, 2008. Respondent

argued the case is now moot. 

Case 2:08-cv-00224-PGR Document 10 Filed 06/11/08 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

On May 7, 2008, this Court gave Petitioner until June 6, 2008, to show good cause

why this case should not be dismissed as moot. The court specifically warned Petitioner that

the case may be dismissed without further notice if he failed to respond. He did not respond.

A review of the docket indicates that the order was returned as undeliverable. (Doc. No. 9.)

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the District Court,

after its independent review of the record, enter an order DISMISSING the Petition for Writ

of Habeas Corpus as MOOT.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636 (b), any party may serve and file written objections within

10 days of being served with a copy of this report and recommendation. If objections are not

timely filed, they may be deemed waived. If objections are filed, the parties should use the

following case number: CV 08-224–PHX-PGR.

DATED this 11th day of June, 2008.

Case 2:08-cv-00224-PGR Document 10 Filed 06/11/08 Page 2 of 2