Jammy Han v. Warden

• Court: District Court, C.D. California
• Decided: February 18, 2025
• Docket: 2:24-cv-08371
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMMY HAN, Case No. 2:24-cv-8371-FWS-RAO

12 Petitioner,

13 v. ORDER DISMISSING PETITION 14 WARDEN, 15 Respondent. 16 17 On September 27, 2024, Petitioner Jammy Han (“Petitioner”)—a then-federal 18 inmate in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) at the Federal Correctional 19 Institution (“FCI”) Medium II in Victorville, California, and proceeding pro se— 20 filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus by a person in federal custody pursuant to 21 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (“Petition”). Dkt. No. 1 (“Pet.”). The Petition claims that the BOP 22 is improperly holding Petitioner at FCI Victorville II even though he is eligible for 23 transfer to a residential reentry center (“RRC”). Pet. at 8. The Petition asks the Court 24 to order the BOP to release Petitioner to an RRC or home confinement. Id. at 9. 25 Petitioner also filed a motion for temporary restraining order (“TRO Motion”) 26 on September 27, 2024, requesting the same relief set forth in the Petition. Dkt. No. 27 2. The Court denied the TRO Motion on October 4, 2024, and subsequently denied 28 Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration. Dkt. Nos. 13, 16. 1 On October 3, 2024, Respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss the Petition 2 (“Motion”), along with a declaration of a BOP program specialist and supporting 3 exhibits. Dkt. No. 8. The Motion contends that the Petition should be dismissed on 4 jurisdictional grounds and, alternatively, for failure to exhaust administrative 5 remedies. Id. at 3–7. With respect to Petitioner’s release date, Respondent calculated 6 a projected release date of February 11, 2025, with First Step Act (“FSA”) credits 7 applied. Dkt. No. 8-1 at 2. Petitioner then filed his response in opposition to 8 Respondent’s Motion. Dkt. Nos. 15, 19. 9 The Court independently conducted a public records check of BOP’s inmate 10 locator which indicates that Petitioner was released from BOP custody on February 11 11, 2025. See Find an Inmate, Fed. Bureau of Prisons, https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc 12 (last visited Feb. 14, 2024). For the following reasons, the Court dismisses the 13 Petition as moot. 14 A federal court’s jurisdiction is limited to actual cases or live controversies. 15 United States v. Yepez, 108 F.4th 1093, 1099 (9th Cir. 2024) (citing Lewis v. Cont’l 16 Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, 477 (1990)). This constitutional limitation to cases or 17 controversies necessarily requires that parties to the litigation have a personal stake 18 in the outcome at all stages of judicial proceedings. Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. 19 Symczyk, 569 U.S. 66, 71–72 (2013). Because federal courts are prohibited from 20 adjudicating matters that do not affect the rights of present litigants, a suit is rendered 21 moot when there exists no live issue for the court to grant relief upon. Chafin v. 22 Chafin, 568 U.S. 165, 172 (2013) (highlighting that Article III of the U.S. 23 Constitution forbids the issuance of advisory opinions where no live case or 24 controversy exists). When a litigant seeks action from an administrative agency, 25 performance by the agency of the relief sought is sufficient to render the claim moot 26 and absolve the federal court of jurisdiction to adjudicate the suit. Rosemere 27 Neighborhood Ass’n v. EPA, 581 F.3d 1169, 1173 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting Pub. Util. 28 Comm’n v. FERC, 100 F.3d 1451, 1458 (9th Cir. 1996)). 1 In bringing this action, Petitioner sought release to an RRC placement or home 2 || detention, and since the filing of the Petition, he has been released. Because 3 || Petitioner has obtained the relief he sought by initiating this action—namely, release 4 || from BOP custody—the matter no longer involves a “live controversy.” Peneueta v. 5 || Ricolcol, No. 2:23-cv-6361, 2024 WL 2884218, at *5 (C.D. Cal. May 21, 2024) 6 || (citing Burnett v. Lampert, 432 F.3d 996, 1000-01 (9th Cir. 2005)). Because 7 || Petitioner was released from BOP custody, his Petition is now moot. 8 For the foregoing reasons, the Petition is dismissed without prejudice. All 9 || pending motions are denied as moot. 10 1 Lo LJ /—— 12 || Dated: February 18, 2025 Hon. Fred W. Slaughter 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28