(HC) Le v. Field Office Director, San Francisco Field Office, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HUY HOANG LE, Case No. 1:24-cv-01272-EPG-HC

Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS, DISMISSING v. PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AS MOOT, AND DIRECTING MESA VERDE ICE PROCESSING CENTER CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE CASE FACILITY ADMINISTRATOR, (ECF No. 22) Respondent. Petitioner is a federal immigration detainee proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a United States magistrate judge. (ECF Nos. 5, 6, 14–16.) For the reasons stated herein, the Court grants Respondent’s motion to dismiss and dismisses the petition for writ of habeas corpus as moot. I. Petitioner is a native and citizen of Vietnam. (ECF No. 1 at 3; ECF No. 22 at 1.1) In 2013, Petitioner was convicted of second-degree murder. After serving sixteen years in California state prison, Petitioner was released from state custody and in January 2024, Petitioner was detained by the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”)/U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE). (ECF No. 1 at 3; ECF No. 22 at 1.) On February 20, 2024, an immigration judge (“IJ”) ordered Petitioner’s removal. (ECF No. 1 at 4; ECF No. 22-1 at 15–16.) Petitioner did not appeal the IJ’s decision. (ECF No. 1 at 4.) On August 30, 2024, Petitioner filed the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. (ECF No. 1.) On October 16, 2024, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California issued an order transferring the petition to this Court in light of the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Doe v. Garland, 109 F.4th 1188 (9th Cir. 2024). (ECF No. 8.) In the petition, Petitioner challenges his prolonged detention, asserting that it violates 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6) as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). Petitioner requests immediate release from custody. (ECF No. 1 at 5.) On November 14, 2024, Petitioner was removed from the United States to Vietnam. (ECF No. 22-1 at 3.) On February 5, 2025, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition as moot. (ECF No. 22.) II. The jurisdiction of federal courts is limited to “actual, ongoing cases or controversies.” Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, 477 (1990). “This case-or-controversy requirement subsists through all stages of federal judicial proceedings,” which “means that, throughout the litigation, the plaintiff ‘must have suffered, or be threatened with, an actual injury traceable to the defendant and likely to be redressed by a favorable judicial decision.’” Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998) (quoting Lewis, 494 U.S. at 477). In the petition, Petitioner challenges his prolonged detention in ICE custody. (ECF No. 1.) On November 14, 2024, Petitioner was removed to Vietnam. (ECF No. 22-1 at 3.) Given that Petitioner is no longer in ICE custody, the Court finds that no case or controversy exists and the petition is moot. See Abdala v. I.N.S., 488 F.3d 1061, 1065 (9th Cir. 2007) (finding habeas petition challenging length of immigration detention moot because “there was no extant controversy for the district court to act upon” when petitioner was subsequently deported, Ii. Accordingly, the Court HEREBY ORDERS: 1. Respondent’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 22) is GRANTED; 2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED as MOOT; and 3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to CLOSE the case. IT IS SO ORDERED.

9! Dated: _May 21, 2025 [see hey UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE