Rufino Ligario Hernandez v. Mark Wayne Mullin, et al.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No.: 8:26-cv-00585 JAK (ADS) Date: April 16, 2026 Title: Rufino Ligario Hernandez v. Mark Wayne Mullin, et al.

Present: The Honorable Autumn D. Spaeth, United States Magistrate Judge

Kristee Hopkins None Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorney(s) Present for Petitioner(s): Attorney(s) Present for Respondent(s): None Present None Present

Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: MOOTNESS

Before the Court is Petitioner Rufino Ligario Hernandez’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (the “Petition”). (Dkt No. 1.) The Petition seeks a constitutionally adequate bond hearing or immediate release from immigration detention. (Id. at 9.) Petitioner has been released from immigration detention. (Dkt. No. 11.)

“A case becomes moot when interim relief or events have deprived the court of the ability to redress the party’s injuries.” United States v. Alder Creek Water Co., 823 F.2d 343, 345 (9th Cir. 1987); see also NASD Disp. Resol., Inc. v. Jud. Council, 488 F.3d 1065, 1068 (9th Cir. 2007) (finding appeal to be moot when the plaintiffs had already been granted the relief they sought). Courts have an obligation to consider mootness sua sponte and should deny requested relief where it is superfluous. In re Burrell, 415 F.3d 994, 997 (9th Cir. 2005). The “basic question in determining mootness is whether there is a present controversy as to which effective relief can be granted.” Nw. Envtl. Def. Ctr. v. Gordon, 849 F.2d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir. 1988).

Here, Petitioner has been released from immigration detention. Petitioner is ordered to show cause why the Petition should not be dismissed as moot. Specifically, by no later than April 23, 2026, the Court orders the parties to meet and confer and file either: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No.: 8:26-cv-00585 JAK (ADS) Date: April 16, 2026 Title: Rufino Ligario Hernandez v. Mark Wayne Mullin, et al. (1) A stipulation of dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A); or (2) A joint status report specifying what claims remain to be decided, including the factual and legal basis for each claim and the relief sought, and proposing a briefing schedule.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Initials of Clerk kh