Inghels v. Superintendent, No. 3:2012cv00754 - Document 15 (N.D. Ind. 2014)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER granting 10 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Jon E DeGuilio on 1/9/2014. (kds)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION SHANE INGHELS, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Petitioner, v. SUPERINTENDENT, Respondent. Case No. 3:12-CV-754 JD OPINION AND ORDER Shane Inghels, a pro se prisoner, filed this habeas corpus case challenging his prison disciplinary hearing (WCC 12-04-167) held at the Westville Correctional Facility on April 20, 2012. In response, the respondent filed a motion to dismiss arguing that, Because the conviction and sanctions challenged in the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in this case have been vacated, and the administrative case has been dismissed in its entirety, this proceeding is now moot and this Court lacks a case or controversy to adjudicate. DE 10 at 2. In addition the respondent has submitted a letter from the Indiana Department of Correction indicating that the charges have been dismissed and the sanctions rescinded. DE 10-1. Though Inghels sought and was granted two enlargements of time to reply, the deadline for doing so passed on December 12, 2013. To date, the court has not received a reply from him. Nevertheless, Inghels won. The respondent conceded. Thus, this case must be dismissed because there is no case or controversy to adjudicate. See Hadley v. Holmes, 341 F.3d 661, 664 (7th Cir. 2003). For the foregoing reasons: the court GRANTS the motion to dismiss (DE 10) and DISMISSES this case. SO ORDERED. ENTERED: January 9, 2014 /s/ JON E. DEGUILIO Judge United States District Court
]]>
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.
