Kosogliad v. Gillis

S.D. Mississippi

Kosogliad v. Gillis

DecidedJune 2, 2021

Docket5:20-cv-00127

StatusUnknown

This text of Kosogliad v. Gillis (Kosogliad v. Gillis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Mississippi primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kosogliad v. Gillis, (S.D. Miss. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI WESTERN DIVISION

EVGENI KOSOGLIAD PETITIONER V. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:20-CV-127-DCB-MTP SHAWN GILLIS, et al. RESPONDENT

ORDER This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Michael T. Parker’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 11]. No party filed objections to the Report and Recommendation, and the deadline for filing such objections has passed. Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, the Petitioner’s Notice of Change of Address [ECF No. 10] (the “Notice”), other submissions of the parties, and applicable law, the Court finds the Report and Recommendation to be well taken. As the Magistrate Judge explained in the Report and Recommendation, the Petitioner stated in his Notice that he was granted release under supervision and currently resides in a private residence in New York. [ECF No. 11 at 1]. Because the Petitioner has been granted release from immigration custody (i.e., the relief sought by the Petitioner in his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF No. 1 at 40]; see Prayer for Relief ¶ 2), the Court agrees with the Report and Recommendation that the Petition no longer presents a live case or controversy for purposes of satisfying Article III, Section 2, of the United

States Constitution and should be dismissed as moot. See, e.g., Sanchez v. Att'y Gen., U.S., 146 F. App'x 547, 549 (3d Cir. 2005)(release of alien from immigration custody rendered his habeas petition moot). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 11] is ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of this Court; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED as moot with prejudice. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.

SO ORDERED this the 2nd day of June 2021.

/s/ David Bramlette_______ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI WESTERN DIVISION

EVGENI KOSOGLIAD PETITIONER V. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:20-CV-127-DCB-MTP SHAWN GILLIS, et al. RESPONDENT

ORDER This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Michael T. Parker’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 11]. No party filed objections to the Report and Recommendation, and the deadline for filing such objections has passed. Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, the Petitioner’s Notice of Change of Address [ECF No. 10] (the “Notice”), other submissions of the parties, and applicable law, the Court finds the Report and Recommendation to be well taken. As the Magistrate Judge explained in the Report and Recommendation, the Petitioner stated in his Notice that he was granted release under supervision and currently resides in a private residence in New York. [ECF No. 11 at 1]. Because the Petitioner has been granted release from immigration custody (i.e., the relief sought by the Petitioner in his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF No. 1 at 40]; see Prayer for Relief ¶ 2), the Court agrees with the Report and Recommendation that the Petition no longer presents a live case or controversy for purposes of satisfying Article III, Section 2, of the United

States Constitution and should be dismissed as moot. See, e.g., Sanchez v. Att'y Gen., U.S., 146 F. App'x 547, 549 (3d Cir. 2005)(release of alien from immigration custody rendered his habeas petition moot). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 11] is ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of this Court; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED as moot with prejudice. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.

SO ORDERED this the 2nd day of June 2021.

/s/ David Bramlette_______ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Kosogliad v. Gillis, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kosogliad-v-gillis-mssd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack