Radzhabov v. United States of America, et al, No. 2:2018cv00119 - Document 8 (M.D. Fla. 2018)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER re: 1 Petition for writ of habeas corpus. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice for Petitioner's failure to comply with the Court's April 23, 2018, Order. Should Petitioner wish to challenge his continued deten tion, he must file a new petition accompanied by the $5.00 filing fee or a motion to proceed as a pauper. Petitioner shall not use the instant case number on any new filing. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate any pending motions, close this case, and enter judgment accordingly. The Clerk is further directed to provide Petitioner with a blank 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas corpus form and affidavit of indecency form with this Order. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 6/11/2018. (SLU)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Radzhabov v. United States of America, et al Doc. 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION FIRDAVS RADZHABOV, Petitioner, v. Case No: 2:18-cv-119-FtM-38CM UNITED STAES OF AMERICA, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, MARC J MOORE, JUAN ACOSTA, JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, KIRSTJEN M. NIELSEN, THOMAS D. HOMAN and DAVID HARDIN, Respondents. / OPINION AND ORDER 1 This matter comes before the Court upon periodic review of the file. Petitioner, a citizen of Tajikistan, initiated this action by filing a pleading entitled “Complaint for Declaratory, Injunctive and Monetary Relief” (Doc. 1), which was construed as a petition for writ of habeas corpus by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and transferred to this Court on February 22, 2018. Doc. 2 and Doc. 3. Upon review, this Court construed the pleading as challenging both Petitioner’s continued detention by 1 Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users’ convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court. Dockets.Justia.com Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as well as seeking monetary and injunctive relief for alleged Bivens violations. 2 Consequently, on April 23, 2018, the Court directed Petitioner to file an amended petition on the form designated for use in Section 2241 proceedings in the instant case, to the extent Petitioner wished to challenge his continued detention. See Doc. 7. Petitioner was directed to file his amended habeas petition within twenty-one (21) days of the Court’s April 23, 2018, Order. Id. at 2, ¶2. Petitioner was cautioned that his failure to comply with the Court’s April 23, 2018, Order would result in the dismissal of this action without further notice. Id. The Court further provided Petitioner with a civil rights complaint form to the extent that he wished to purse monetary or injunctive relief in a separate action stemming from the alleged Bivens’ violations raised in his pleading. Id. at 2, ¶3. On May 7, 2018, the Court’s April 23, 2018 Order was returned to the Court as “undeliverable.” On May 9, 2018, after independently locating Petitioner’s current address, the Clerk forwarded a copy of the April 23, 2018 Order to Petitioner. 3 The April 23, 2018, Order resent to Petitioner, on May 9, 2018, has not been returned to the Court. As of the date on this Order, Petitioner has not complied with the Court’s April 23, 2018, Order or explained his inability to comply and the time for doing so has expired. ACCORDINGLY, it is hereby 2In Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), the Supreme Court recognized an implied cause of action for damages against federal officers to redress a constitutional violation. 3 The Court, in its February 22, 2108, Standing Order, previously notified Petitioner that he was required to advise the Clerk of any change of address. See Doc. 5 at 3, ¶6. The Standing Order apparently was delivered to Petitioner as it was not returned as “undeliverable.” As of the date of this Order, Petitioner has not yet notified the Clerk of his change of address. 2 ORDERED: 1. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice for Petitioner’s failure to comply with the Court’s April 23, 2018, Order. Should Petitioner wish to challenge his continued detention, he must file a new petition accompanied by the $5.00 filing fee or a motion to proceed as a pauper. Petitioner shall not use the instant case number on any new filing. 2. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate any pending motions, close this case, and enter judgment accordingly. 3. The Clerk is further directed to provide Petitioner with a blank 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas corpus form and affidavit of indecency form with this Order. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 11th day of June, 2018. SA: FTMP-1 Copies: All Parties of Record 3
]]>
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.
