Court Opinion

ID: 9555924
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-15 18:01:14.437085+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:36:51.751221
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50279    Document: 00516858176        Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/15/2023

           United States Court of Appeals
                for the Fifth Circuit                             United States Court of Appeals
                               ____________                                Fifth Circuit

                                                                         FILED
                                No. 23-50279                       August 15, 2023
                              Summary Calendar                      Lyle W. Cayce
                              ____________                               Clerk

   Vamsidhar Reddy Vurimindi,

                                                         Plaintiff—Appellant,

                                     versus

   Jose M. Correa, Field Office Director - San Antonio, Enforcement and
   Removal Operations (ERO), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement;
   Sean Ervin, Field Office Director - Philadelphia, Enforcement and Removal
   Operations (ERO), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Kerry E.
   Doyle, Principal Legal Advisor, Office of the Principal Legal Advisor
   (OPLA); Melody Brukiewa, Chief Counsel for Baltimore Office of the
   Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA); JoAnn McLane, Chief Counsel for San
   Antonio Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA); David L. Neal,
   Acting Chief Immigration Judge; Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary,
   U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Daniel H. Weiss, Acting Chief
   Immigration Judge; Tae D. Johnson, Acting Director, U.S. Immigration
   and Customs Enforcement; Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General;
   United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement;
   United States Department of Homeland Security,

                                          Defendants—Appellees.
                 ______________________________

                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Western District of Texas
                           USDC No. 1:23-CV-262
                 ______________________________
Case: 23-50279         Document: 00516858176             Page: 2      Date Filed: 08/15/2023

   Before King, Higginson, and Willett, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Plaintiff-Appellant Vamsidhar Vurimindi, proceeding pro se, appeals
   the district court’s dismissal of his complaint seeking (i) to compel the Board
   of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) to terminate his removal proceedings and
   (ii) to compel Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) to terminate
   his reporting requirements. Vurimindi concedes in his brief that both of these
   things have happened. He has therefore been granted the relief he sought in
   his complaint, and his claims are rendered moot for absence of a justiciable
   case or controversy. See Bailey v. Southerland, 821 F.2d 277, 278-79 (5th Cir.
   1987) (per curiam).
          Vurimindi argues that his claims are not moot because his removal
   proceedings were terminated without prejudice, and he “seek[s] an order
   compelling BIA to terminate removal proceedings with prejudice.” But
   again, Vurimindi does not have a justiciable claim. There is no indication that
   the BIA intends to reopen his removal proceedings, which were closed
   following the Third Circuit’s vacatur of the BIA’s order of removability on
   the basis that Vurimindi’s state offense did not qualify as a removable
   offense. Vurimindi v. Att’y Gen. U.S., 46 F.4th 134, 148 (3d Cir. 2022). Even
   assuming the BIA’s dismissal without prejudice might suggest some
   possibility of renewed proceedings, “the mere possibility of future
   consequences is too speculative to give rise to a case or controversy.” Bailey,
   821 F.2d at 279.
          DISMISSED.

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.