The opinion
a
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
RUSLAN SULEIMANOV #A249-116- CIVIL DOCKET NO. 1:25-CV-00832
981, SEC P
Petitioner
VERSUS JUDGE TERRY A. DOUGHTY
U S IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS MAGISTRATE JUDGE PEREZ-MONTES
ENFORCEMENT ET AL,
Respondents
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Before the Court is a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. §
2241 filed by pro se Petitioner Ruslan Suleimanov (“Suleimanov”). At the time of
filing, Suleimanov was an immigration detainee at River Correctional Center in
Ferriday, Louisiana. He alleges that there is no likelihood of his removal in the
reasonably foreseeable future, and he seeks his release from custody.
Because Suleimanov has been deported, the Petition should be DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
I. Background
Suleimanov is a native and citizen of Russia, who applied for admission into
the United States at San Ysidro Port of Entry on September 9, 2023. ECF No. 13-1
at 1. An immigration judge found Suleimanov to be removable to Russia.
Suleimanov requested voluntary departure to Turkey, which was granted.
The Government also granted multiple requests to extend the deadline for voluntary
departure. Because Suleimanov failed to depart to Turkey within the allotted
time, the Government removed him to Russia on September 30, 2025. . at 2.
II. Law and Analysis
Article III of the Constitution limits the judicial power of the United States to
the resolution of “Cases” and “Controversies.”
, 551 U.S. 587, 597 (2007) (quoting , 547
U.S. 332, 342 (2006) (internal quotations and citations omitted)). A case becomes
moot “when the issues presented are no longer ‘live’ or the parties lack a legally
cognizable interest in the outcome.” , 445
U.S. 388, 396 (1980) (quoting , 395 U.S. 486, 496 (1969)).
The case-or-controversy requirement “subsists through all stages of federal
judicial proceedings, trial and appellate.” , 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998)
(citations omitted). The parties must continue to have a “personal stake in the
outcome” of the lawsuit. Therefore, throughout the litigation, the petitioner
“must have suffered, or be threatened with, an actual injury traceable to the
defendant and likely to be redressed by a favorable judicial decision.”
Because Suleimanov has been deported, the § 2241 claim for release is moot.
, 3:19-CV-976, 2019 WL 3468909 (N.D. Tex. 2019)
(collecting cases), , 2019 WL 3459817 (N.D. Tex.
2019). If a controversy is moot, the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.
, 582 F.2d 14, 16 (5th Cir. 1978) (citing , 404 U.S. 244,
246 (1971); Locke v. Board of Public Instruction, 499 F.2d 359, 363-364 (5th Cir.
1974)).
Ill. Conclusion
Because Suleimanov is no longer in custody, IT IS RECOMMENDED that the
Petition (ECF No. 1) be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject
matter jurisdiction.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), a party may file
written objections to this Report and Recommendation within 14 days of service,
unless the Court grants an extension of time to file objections under Fed. R. Civ. P.
6(b). A party may also respond to another party’s objections to this Report and
Recommendation within 14 days of service of those objections, again unless the Court
grants an extension of time to file a response to objections.
No other briefs may be filed without leave of court, which will only be granted
for good cause. A party’s failure to timely file written objections to this Report and
Recommendation will bar a party from later challenging factual or legal conclusions
adopted by the District Judge, except if the challenge asserts “plain error.”
SIGNED on Thursday, November 20, 2025.
Hip
JOSEPH H.L. PEREZ-MONTES
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE