IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JOSE LORENZO AMAYA ALEMAN, No. 3:20-CV-00448

Petitioner, (Judge Brann)

v. (Magistrate Judge Saporito)

CRAIG LOWE, et al.,

Respondents.

ORDER APRIL 27, 2020 Jose Lorenzo Amaya Aleman, an individual previously detained by the United States Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, filed this

petition challenging the legality of his detention pending his removal from the county.1 Aleman later filed a motion for a temporary restraining order.2 On April 6, 2020, Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr., issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court deny as moot the motion for a temporary restraining order and dismiss as moot Aleman’s petition, as Aleman has been removed from the United States.3 No timely objections were filed to this Report and Recommendation.

1 Doc. 1. 2 Doc. 3. 3 Doc. 11. Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, this Court will review the recommendation only for clear error.4 Regardless of whether timely

objections are made, district courts may accept, reject, or modify—in whole or in part—the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.5 After reviewing the record, the Court finds no error—clear or otherwise—in Magistrate

Judge Saporito’s conclusion that this Court may no longer grant the requested relief, and that Aleman’s § 2241 petition is therefore moot. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr.’s Report and Recommendation

(Doc. 11), is ADOPTED; 2. Aleman’s motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. 3) is DENIED as moot;

3. Aleman’s

petition (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED as moot; and 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case. BY THE COURT:

s/ Matthew W. Brann Matthew W. Brann United States District Judge

4 Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see Henderson v. Carlson,

(3d Cir. 1987) (explaining that court should in some manner review recommendations regardless of whether objections were filed). 5

(b)(1); Local Rule 72.31.