Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Shaikh v. Jean

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Alexandria Division

September 10, 2019

FAHIM ABDUL SHAIKH, Petitioner
v.
CHARLES W. JEAN, Respondents

          DEE D. DRELL JUDGE

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          JOSEPH H.L. PEREZ-MONTES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         Before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 11) the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 filed by pro se Petitioner Fahim Abdul Shaikh (“Shaikh”) (#075535367). At the time of filing, Shaikh was an immigration detainee in the custody of the Department of Homeland Security/U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“DHS/ICE”). Shaikh was being detained at the LaSalle Detention Center in Jena, Louisiana, and challenged his continued detention pending removal.

         Because Shaikh has been removed from the United States, the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 11) should be GRANTED.

         I. Background

         Shaikh is a native and citizen of Pakistan. Shaikh alleges that he was issued a final order of removal on June 14, 2018. (Doc. 1, p. 2). Shaikh claims he has been detained by ICE since he was ordered removed, and there is no significant likelihood of his removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. (Doc. 1).

         In its Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 11), the Government claims that Shaikh has been removed.

         II. Law and Analysis

         The relief sought by Shaikh was his immediate release from custody. However, Shaikh is no longer in DHS/ICE custody. (Docs. 11-2, 11-3).

         “Article III of the Constitution limits federal ‘Judicial Power,' that is, federal-court jurisdiction, to ‘Cases' and ‘Controversies.'” United States Parole Comm'n v. Geraghty, 445 U.S. 388, 395 (1980). A case becomes moot “when the issues presented are no longer ‘live' or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.” Id. at 396 (quoting Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 496 (1969)). The case-or-controversy requirement “subsists through all stages of federal judicial proceedings, trial and appellate.” Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998) (citations omitted). The parties must continue to have a “personal stake in the outcome” of the lawsuit. Id. Therefore, throughout the litigation, the plaintiff “must have suffered, or be threatened with, an actual injury traceable to the defendant and likely to be redressed by a favorable judicial decision.” Id.

         Based on the Government's evidence showing that Shaikh has been removed (Doc. 11-3), the § 2241 Petition is moot. See Francis v. Lynch, 622 Fed.Appx. 455, 455-56 (5th Cir. 2015) (challenge to length of detention awaiting removal under Zadvydas became moot when petitioner was removed); Odus v. Ashcroft, 61 Fed.Appx. 121 (5th Cir. 2003) (same). If a controversy is moot, the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Carr v. Saucier, 582 F.2d 14, 16 (5th Cir. 1978) (citing North Carolina v. Rice, 404 U.S. 244, 246 (1971); Locke v. Board of Public Instruction, 499 F.2d 359, 363-364 (5th Cir. 1974)).

         III. Conclusion

         Because Shaikh is no longer in DHS/ICE custody, IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 11) be GRANTED, and Shaikh's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) be DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction, WITH PREJUDICE as to the jurisdictional issue, and WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to the merits of Shaikh's claim.[1]

         Under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), parties aggrieved by this Report and Recommendation have 14 calendar days from service of this Report and Recommendation to file specific, written objections with the Clerk of Court. A party may respond to another party's objections within 14 days after being served with a copy thereof. No. other briefs (such as supplemental objections, reply briefs, etc.) may be filed. Providing a courtesy copy of the objection ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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