Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-00978/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-00978-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Charlie Gonzalez
Petitioner
Katherine Kane
Respondent

Document Text:

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

WO

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Charlie Gonzalez, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Katherine Kane, 

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-07-0978-PHX-FJM

ORDER

The court has before it petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2241 (doc. 1), respondent’s answer (doc. 14), and petitioner’s reply (doc. 16). We

also have before us the report and recommendation of the United States magistrate judge

(doc. 23). Petitioner has not objected to the report and recommendation and the time for

doing so has expired.

Since filing his petition for habeas corpus challenging his detention pending removal,

petitioner has been removed, and has failed to prosecute this action. The magistrate judge

recommends dismissing this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R.

Civ. P. 41(b). Pursuant to Rule 72(b), Fed. R. Civ. P., we accept the recommendation of the

magistrate judge.

We alternatively deny the petition on the ground of mootness. The petition asserts

only that petitioner’s continued detention pending removal violates his constitutional rights.

Case 2:07-cv-00978-FJM Document 25 Filed 05/15/08 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 -

It does not assert that any collateral consequences arose from the detention. Therefore,

petitioner’s removal renders his petition moot. See Abdala v. INS, 488 F.3d 1061, 1064 (9th

Cir. 2007) (holding that the petition is moot upon petitioner’s deportation “where the grounds

for habeas relief will not redress collateral consequences”).

IT IS ORDERED DISMISSING this action without prejudice for failure to

prosecute, and alternatively DENYING the petition on the ground of mootness (doc. 1). 

DATED this 14th day of May, 2008.

Case 2:07-cv-00978-FJM Document 25 Filed 05/15/08 Page 2 of 2