Hernandez v. Warden Childress

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN DIVISION

JOSE HERNANDEZ PETITIONER V. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-CV-151-DPJ-ASH WARDEN CHILDRESS RESPONDENT

ORDER Jose Hernandez filed a motion for a writ of mandamus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 while incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Complex in Yazoo City, Mississippi. Compl. [1] at 1. On September 9, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Andrew S. Harris entered a Report and Recommendation [17]. Judge Harris recommends that Hernandez’s petition be dismissed as moot because the Bureau of Prisons released him from custody on July 10, 2025. R&R [17] at 2–3. The Court mailed Hernandez the R&R, but it was returned to sender on September 15, 2025. No objection has been filed, and the time to do so has passed. See id. at 3 (advising of 14- day deadline to file objection). “When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note (1983), quoted in Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded on other grounds by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) as noted in Alexander v. Verizon Wireless Servs., L.L.C., 875 F.3d 243, 248 (5th Cir. 2017). Having reviewed the record and found no clear error, the Court accepts Judge Harris’s well- reasoned recommendations. IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [17] of United States Magistrate Judge Andrew S. Harris is adopted as this Couret’s finding and holding. Consistent with the Report and Recommendation, Petitioner’s petition [1] is dismissed. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the 25th day of September, 2025.

s/ Daniel P. Jordan III UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE