U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, 2020

Ahmed v. DHS-ICE Chief Counsel

Ahmed v. DHS-ICE Chief Counsel
U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota · Decided October 16, 2020

Ahmed v. DHS-ICE Chief Counsel

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Abdirahman D. A., File No. 19-cv-3172 (ECT/KMM) Petitioner, v. ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT DHS-ICE Chief Counsel, AND RECOMMENDATION Attorney General, and Sherburne County Sheriff, Respondents. ________________________________________________________________________ This matter is before the Court on the October 1, 2020 Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Katherine Menendez. ECF No. 31. No party has objected to that Report and Recommendation, and the Court therefore reviews it for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Finding no clear error, and based upon all of the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 31] is ACCEPTED; 2. Petitioner Abdirahman D. A.’s Motion for Custody Re-Determination [ECF No. 21] is DENIED AS MOOT; 3. Petitioner Abdirahman D. A.’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF No. 1] is DENIED AS MOOT; and 3. The action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

Dated: October 16, 2020 s/ Eric C. Tostrud Eric C. Tostrud United States District Court

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Abdirahman D. A., File No. 19-cv-3172 (ECT/KMM) Petitioner, v. ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT DHS-ICE Chief Counsel, AND RECOMMENDATION Attorney General, and Sherburne County Sheriff, Respondents. ________________________________________________________________________ This matter is before the Court on the October 1, 2020 Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Katherine Menendez. ECF No. 31. No party has objected to that Report and Recommendation, and the Court therefore reviews it for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Finding no clear error, and based upon all of the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 31] is ACCEPTED; 2. Petitioner Abdirahman D. A.’s Motion for Custody Re-Determination [ECF No. 21] is DENIED AS MOOT; 3. Petitioner Abdirahman D. A.’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF No. 1] is DENIED AS MOOT; and 3. The action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

Dated: October 16, 2020 s/ Eric C. Tostrud Eric C. Tostrud United States District Court

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.