Entry Granting Respondent's Motion to Dismiss
TANYA WALTON PRATT, District Judge.
Ramar Daniels filed his petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging prison disciplinary proceeding No. CIC 16-09-0009, in which he lost 30 days of good time credits. Before the case could be fully briefed, the Indiana Department of Correction reviewed the disciplinary case and vacated the guilty verdict, rescinded all sanctions including the earned credit time loss, and set the matter for a new hearing. Respondent now moves to dismiss the action, contending that it is moot. The motion to dismiss was filed May 8, 2017. Petitioner has not responded.
A case becomes moot, and the federal courts lose subject matter jurisdiction, when a justiciable controversy ceases to exist between the parties. See Church of Scientology of Cal. v. United States, 506 U.S. 9, 12 (1992) ("if an event occurs while a case is pending . . . that makes it impossible for the court to grant `any effectual relief whatever' to a prevailing party, the [case] must be dismissed.") (quoting Mills v. Green, 159 U.S. 651, 653 (1895)); Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305, 317 (1988) (grounding mootness doctrine in the Constitution's Article III requirement that courts adjudicate only "actual, ongoing cases or controversies").
The uncontroverted attachments to respondent's motion show that the disciplinary sanctions at issue in Case No. CIC 16-09-0009 were vacated. There is therefore no case or controversy for this Court to resolve.
Respondent's motion to dismiss, dkt. , is