(HC) Valdez v. Nielsen et al, No. 1:2018cv00398 - Document 15 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER Directing Clerk of Court to Assign District Judge - CASE ASSIGNED to District Judge Dale A. Drozd and Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson. New Case No. 1:18-cv-00398 DAD JDP (HC); FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS to Grant Respondent's Motion to Dismiss 13 , signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 9/2/2018: 14-Day Deadline. (Hellings, J)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 Case No. 1:18-cv-00398-JDP SANTIAGO ESTRADA VALDEZ, 10 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO GRANT RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS Petitioner, 11 v. 12 (Doc. No. 13.) KRISTEN M. NIELSEN, et al., 13 14 OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE IN 14 DAYS Respondent. ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Petitioner Santiago Estrada Valdez was detained by the U.S. Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) at the time he filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. This court issued an order requiring respondent to file a response to the petition. (Doc. No. 6.) Respondent has filed a response to that included a motion to dismiss the petition for mootness. (Doc. No. 13.) Respondent states Valdez has been released from custody under an order of supervision. (See id. at 1.) In support of this contention, respondent has submitted a copy of the order dated April 25, 2018. (Doc. No. 13-1.) Valdez has not responded to the motion to dismiss and several case filings have been returned to the court as undeliverable. For these reasons: 1. The clerk of the court is directed to randomly assign a district judge to this case; 2. Respondent directed to mail a copy of these findings and recommendations to 28 1 petitioner at his last known address; and 1 3. It is recommended that: 2 3 a. respondent’s motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 13) be granted; 4 b. the petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1) be denied as moot; and 5 c. the clerk be directed to close this case. All motions must be submitted on the record, and briefs must be filed without oral 6 7 argument unless otherwise ordered by the court. See Local Rule 230(l). The court will grant 8 extensions only upon a showing of good cause. If a party requires an extension, that party 9 should file a motion for amendment of the schedule before the relevant deadline has passed and 10 should explain in detail why an extension is required. Local Rule 110 applies to this order. 11 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the U.S. district judge assigned to the 12 case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen (14) days of 13 service of these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the 14 court. If plaintiff files such objections, he should do so in a document captioned “Objections to 15 Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 16 objections within the specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. See Wilkerson 17 v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 18 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 19 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 Dated: September 2, 2018 22 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
