Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01589/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-01589-0/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

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DUC QUOC BUI,

Petitioner,

v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney 

General,

Respondent.

Case No. 1:15-cv-01589 MJS (HC)

ORDER DIRECTING PETITIONER TO FILE 

A RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT’S 

MOTION TO DISMISS

(30 Day Deadline) 

Petitioner is a citizen of Vietnam who is challenging his detainment under the 

authority of the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE"). He is 

proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 

Respondent is represented by Audrey B. Hemesath of the office of the United States 

Attorney. Both parties have consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 

636(c). (ECF Nos. 7-8.)

On November 16, 2015, Respondent filed an answer to the petition. (ECF No. 

11.) Petitioner filed a traverse to the answer on November 30, 2015. (ECF No. 13.) On 

February 2, 2016, due to changed circumstances, namely Petitioner’s release from ICE 

Case 1:15-cv-01589-MJS Document 16 Filed 02/04/16 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

custody under order of supervision, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition as 

moot. (ECF No. 15.) As the issues raised in the motion to dismiss supersede those 

presented in earlier-filed answer, the Court shall not consider the issues raised in the 

answer until after addressing those presented in the motion to dismiss. 

Petitioner shall be provided an opportunity to respond to the motion to dismiss. 

The Court hereby ORDERS that if Petitioner wishes to file an opposition to the motion to 

dismiss, he must do so within thirty (30) days of the date of service of this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 3, 2016 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-01589-MJS Document 16 Filed 02/04/16 Page 2 of 2