1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SINGH JASWINDER, Case No. 2:20-cv-07964-FMO (AFM) 12 Petitioner, ORDER DISMISSING PETITION 13 v. AS MOOT 14 KEVIN McALEENAN, et al., 15 Respondents. 16 17 18 BACKGROUND 19 On August 28, 2020, Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus 20 pursuant to

. At the time he filed the petition, Petitioner was subject 21 to a final order of removal and was in custody of the United States Immigration and 22 Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). The petition challenges Petitioner’s continued 23 detention by ICE pending his removal. Specifically, the petition alleges that 24 Petitioner has been detained without removal for longer than six months and is 25 entitled to be released under Zadvydas v. Davis,

(2001). (ECF No. 1 at 26 2-7.) 27 On October 26, 2020, Respondents filed a Motion to Dismiss the Petition as 28 Moot. According to the Motion and exhibits attached thereto, Petitioner was released 1 from custody on October 21, 2020. (ECF No. 7.) On October 27, 2020, the Court 2 received Petitioner’s Notice of Change of Address, in which he indicates he was 3 conditionally released on October 21, 2020. (ECF No. 9.) On the same date, the Court 4 issued an order informing Petitioner that he had until November 12, 2020 to file and 5 serve any opposition to Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 8.) As of the date 6 of this order, Petitioner has neither filed an opposition to the motion nor requested 7 additional time within which to do so. 8 DISCUSSION 9 Federal court jurisdiction is limited to adjudication of actual cases and live 10 controversies. Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp.,

(1990); North 11 Carolina v. Rice,

(1971) (per curiam). A petition for a writ of 12 habeas corpus becomes moot when a prisoner who requests release from custody is 13 released before the court has addressed the merits of the petition. See Lane v.

U.S. 624, 631 (1982); Spencer v. Kemna,

(1998). 15 This petition requests an order releasing Petitioner from ICE custody under 16 reasonable conditions of supervision. (ECF No. 1 at 5.) Because Petitioner already 17 has been released from ICE custody, there is no additional relief that this Court could 18 grant him. Accordingly, the question of the constitutional validity of his continued 19 detention no longer presents a live controversy. See Abdala v. I.N.S.,

, 20 1064 (9th Cir. 2007) (“a petitioner’s release from detention under an order of 21 supervision ‘moot[s] his challenge to the legality of his extended detention’”); see 22 also Martinez-Reyes v. Burns,

, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2011) 23 (“since petitioner’s removal from the United States has released him from ICE 24 custody, he has received the only relief this Court might provide him, and the pending 25 Petition is moot”), report and recommendation adopted,

(C.D. 26 Cal. Apr. 11, 2011). 27 /// 28 /// 1 For the foregoing reasons, the petition is dismissed without prejudice as moot, 2 and the case is closed. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 DATED: November 24, 2020

6 ____________/s/______________________ 7 FERNANDO M. OLGUIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28