LIU v. SESSIONS

Case No. 17-CV-477-FPG.

BAO HUA LIU, Petitioner. v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, Attorney General of the United States, et al., Respondents.

United States District Court, W.D. New York.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Nature of Suit: 463 Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Bao Hua Liu, Petitioner, Pro Se.

Jeff Sessions, Respondent, represented by Mary C. Kane , U.S. Attorney's Office.

Thomas P. Brophy, Respondent, represented by Mary C. Kane , U.S. Attorney's Office.

Department of Homeland Security, Respondent, represented by Mary C. Kane , U.S. Attorney's Office.

Joe Koson, Respondent, represented by Mary C. Kane , U.S. Attorney's Office.


DECISION AND ORDER

FRANK P. GERACI, Jr., Chief District Judge.

Pro se Petitioner Bao Hua Liu ("Petitioner") has filed this action seeking a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. ECF No. 1. Petitioner alleges that he was ordered removed to China, but he has not yet been removed, and instead has remained in the custody of the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") for over six months pending his deportation. Id. Due to this delay, Petitioner seeks to be released from custody.

The government has moved to dismiss this case because Petitioner has now been released from DHS custody, making this action moot. See ECF Nos. 5, 6. Petitioner did not respond to the government's motion.

"Where an alien challenging his detention under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is released during the pendency of his petition under an order of supervision, the petition is rendered moot." Harvey v. Holder, 63 F.Supp.3d 318, 320 (W.D.N.Y. 2014). Here, the uncontroverted evidence demonstrates that Petitioner was released from DHS custody on June 27, 2017. See ECF No. 5-1. As such, this action has become moot, and must be dismissed.

CONCLUSION

The government's Motion to Dismiss (ECF Nos. 5, 6) is granted, as this case has become moot. No certificate of appealability shall issue, as Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases