Fakir Rodwall v. Lee Boca et al
Filing
6
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym: Order to Show Cause Why Petition Should Not Be Dismissed as Moot Following Petitioner's Release From Custody. Accordingly, within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order, that is, by June 20, 2012, petitioner is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing, why this action should not be dismissed as moot in light of his release from custody (SEE MINUTES FOR DETAILS). (kca)
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.
CV 12-3991-GHK (SP)
Title
FAKIR RODWALL v. LEE BOCA, et al.
Present: The Honorable
Date
May 31, 2012
Sheri Pym, United States Magistrate Judge
Kimberly I. Carter
Deputy Clerk
n/a
Court Reporter / Recorder
n/a
Tape No.
Attorneys Present for Petitioner:
Attorneys Present for Respondent:
n/a
n/a
Proceedings:
(In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Why Petition Should Not Be
Dismissed as Moot Following Petitioner's Release From Custody
On May 8, 2012, petitioner Fakir Rodwall filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The petition
challenged petitioner's detention by the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") and
Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") pursuant to an ICE detainer following
local custody. Pet. at 5-6. Petitioner sought his release from custody. Pet. at 8.
“[F]ederal courts may not ‘give opinions upon moot questions or abstract
propositions.’” Calderon v. Moore, 518 U.S. 149, 150, 116 S. Ct. 2066, 135 L. Ed. 2d
453 (1996) (per curiam) (quoting Mills v. Green, 159 U.S. 651, 653, 16 S. Ct. 132, 40 L.
Ed. 293 (1895)). If “the habeas petition[] raise[s] claims that were fully resolved by
release from custody,” the petition is moot. Abdala v. INS, 488 F.3d 1061, 1065 (9th
Cir. 2007); see also Munoz v. Rowland, 104 F.3d 1096, 1097-98 (9th Cir. 1997) (holding
that when the petition seeks relief from conditions of confinement, petitioner’s release
from prison renders the petition moot); Picrin-Peron v. Rison, 930 F.2d 773, 776 (9th
Cir. 1991) (holding that since release from custody was the only relief sought,
petitioner’s subsequent release rendered the case moot).
On May 25, 2012, respondents filed a notice informing the court that petitioner
was released from ICE custody on March 21, 2012. The instant petition may therefore
be moot.
Accordingly, within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order, that is, by June
20, 2012, petitioner is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing, why this action
should not be dismissed as moot in light of his release from custody. Petitioner is
cautioned that his failure to timely file a response to this Order to Show Cause will be
deemed by the court as consent to the dismissal of his petition and this action. If
CV-90 (06/04)
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.
CV 12-3991-GHK (SP)
Date
Title
May 31, 2012
FAKIR RODWALL v. LEE BOCA, et al.
petitioner no longer wishes to pursue this action in light of his release, he may file the
attached Notice of Voluntary Dismissal in lieu of responding to this Order to Show
Cause.
Petitioner may also have failed to immediately notify the court of any change in
petitioner’s address. On May 18, 2012, the court issued its Order Requiring Response to
Petition and mailed that Order to petitioner at his address of record, his place of
incarceration at Adelanto-East Detention Facility in Adelanto, California. That mailing
was returned to the court as undeliverable on May 29, 2012. Although petitioner never
received the court’s Order notifying him of his duty to immediately notify the court of
any change of address, he has nevertheless failed to comply with Local Rule 41-6. Local
Rule 41-6, states as follows:
If mail directed by the Clerk to a pro se plaintiff’s address of record is returned
undelivered by the Postal Service, and if, within fifteen (15) days of the service
date, such plaintiff fails to notify, in writing, the Court and opposing parties of his
current address, the Court may dismiss the action with or without prejudice for
want of prosecution."
In light of the uncertainty surrounding petitioner’s location, the Clerk of the Court
is directed to mail this Order to Show Cause to (1) petitioner’s address of record at the
Adelanto-East Detention Facility and (2) to the service address noted by respondents as
the last address provided by petitioner upon his release from respondents’ custody:
Fakir Rodwall
259 South Harvard Boulevard, No. 203
Los Angeles, CA 90004
CV-90 (06/04)
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Page 2 of 2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
