Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jalloh v. U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security

United States District Court, Third Circuit

October 10, 2013

ALPHA A. JALLOH, Petitioner,
v.
U.S. DEPT. OF HOMELAND SECURITY (ICE), et al. Respondents

MEMORANDUM

MALACHY E. MANNION, District Judge.

Pending before the court is the report and recommendation, (Doc. No. 11), of Judge Susan E. Schwab recommending that the petition for writ of habeas corpus, (Doc. No. 1), be dismissed as moot, and that petitioner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, (Doc. No. 3), be granted. The petitioner has not filed objections to the report and recommendation.[1] The report will be ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY, the motion to proceed in forma pauperis will be GRANTED, and the petition for writ of habeas corpus will be DISMISSED and the case closed.

I. STANDARD OF REVIEW

When objections are timely filed to the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge, the district court must review de novo those portions of the report to which objections are made. 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1); Brown v. Astrue , 649 F.3d 193, 195 (3d Cir. 2011). Although the standard is de novo, the extent of review is committed to the sound discretion of the district judge, and the court may rely on the recommendations of the magistrate judge to the extent it deems proper. Rieder v. Apfel , 115 F.Supp.2d 496, 499 (M.D.Pa. 2000) (citing United States v. Raddatz , 447 U.S. 667, 676 (1980)).

Where, as here, no objections to a report and recommendation are made, the court should, as a matter of good practice, "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see also Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Intern., Inc. , 702 F.Supp.2d 465, 469 (M.D.Pa. 2010) (citing Henderson v. Carlson , 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987) (explaining judges should give some review to every report and recommendation)). Nevertheless, whether timely objections are made or not, the district court may accept, not accept, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.31.

III. DISCUSSION

The sole relief requested in the petition for habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is immediate release from detention by Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE"). (Doc. No. 1). Petitioner has since been released from custody under an order of supervision pending removal. ( See Doc. No. 8-1). As thoroughly explained in Judge Schwab's report, his habeas petition for release is now moot. See Sanchez v. Attorney General , 146 Fed.Appx. 547, 549 (3d Cir. 2005)(dismissing an appeal as moot where petitioner sought release and had already been released from custody). Thus, the report and recommendation of Judge Schwab will be ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY, petitioner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis GRANTED, and the petition for writ of habeas corpus DISMISSED as moot. An appropriate order shall issue.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.