# Opinion

> District Court, W.D. Louisiana · January 6, 2026

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11239316

## Case

- **Full name:** Patricia Alejandra Rondon Hernandez v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al.
- **Court:** District Court, W.D. Louisiana
- **Decided:** January 6, 2026
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11239316

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

MONROE DIVISION

PATRICIA ALEJANDRA RONDON CIVIL ACTION NO. 25-1618
HERNANDEZ
SECTION P
VS.
JUDGE JERRY EDWARDS, JR.

U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS MAG. JUDGE KAYLA D. MCCLUSKY
ENFORCEMENT, ET AL.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Petitioner Patricia Alejandra Rondon Hernandez,1 who was previously in the custody of
the Department of Homeland Security and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, petitions the Court for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.2 For
reasons below, the Court should dismiss her petition as moot.
Background

Petitioner is a citizen of Venezuela. [doc. # 1-2, p. 4]. She entered the United States on
or about January 21, 2025. [doc. # 1-2, p. 4]. She was taken into immigration custody on
January 26, 2025. [doc. # 1, p. 6]. She was ordered removed from the United States on February
21, 2025. Id. The same day, a DHS asylum officer determined it was more likely than not that

1 Petitioner’s “A-Number” is 231432548.

2 This matter has been referred to the undersigned for review, report, and recommendation under
28 U.S.C. § 636, and the standing orders of the Court.
Petitioner would be tortured in Venezuela. [doc. # 1-3, p. 1]. She did not appeal to the Board of
Immigration Appeals. [doc. # 1, p. 6].
Petitioner filed the instant Petition on October 23, 2025. [doc. # 1, p. 10]. Channeling
Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001), she primarily claimed that she had been detained

beyond the removal period authorized by statute and that ICE was not likely to remove her in the
near future. Id. at 8.
Petitioner sought immediate release from custody. [doc. # 1, p. 9]. Petitioner, however,
has been released from custody. [doc. #s 25, 26]. She was removed from the United States to
Mexico. Id.
Law and Analysis
A petitioner "must separately satisfy the case-or-controversy requirement of Article III,
Section 2 of the Constitution." Herndon v. Upton, 2021 WL 116535, at *2 (5th Cir. Jan. 13,
2021) (citing Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998)). Jurisdiction is constrained to
adjudicating “actual, ongoing controversies between litigants.” Deakins v. Monaghan, 484 U.S.

193, 199 (1988). “In order to maintain jurisdiction, the court must have before it an actual case
or controversy at all stages of the judicial proceedings.” U.S. v. Vega, 960 F.3d 669, 672 (5th
Cir. 2020). “A case becomes moot only when it is impossible for a court to grant any effectual
relief whatever to the prevailing party.” Knox v. Serv. Emps. Int'l Union, Loc. 1000, 567 U.S.
298, 307 (2012) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
“Simply stated, a case is moot when the issues presented are no longer ‘live’ or the
parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.” Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486,
496 (1969). A claim is moot when a petitioner achieves the precise relief she requested. See
New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n, Inc. v. City of New York, New York, 140 S. Ct. 1525, 1526
(2020). Courts are "obliged to raise the subject of mootness sua sponte." Bailey v. Southerland,
821 F.2d 277, 278 (5th Cir. 1987).
Here, Petitioner sought release from custody. Petitioner was released from custody when
she was removed from the United States. As she is no longer subject to the detention she

challenges, her Petition is moot. See Bailey v. Southerland, 821 F.2d 277, 278 (5th Cir. 1987)
(“Because Bailey was released . . . this court can no longer provide him with that relief.”);
Herndon, 2021 WL 116535, at *2 ("Herndon's release mooted her § 2241 petition,
notwithstanding her continued supervision, because there was no longer a live case or
controversy for which any relief could be granted. Herndon had already received the sole relief
sought in her petition: release from confinement."); Nyabwa v. Dep't of Homeland Sec.
Immigration & Customs Enf't Field Office Dir., 537 F. App'x 451 (5th Cir. 2013). The
undersigned acknowledges that Petitioner filed a change of address subsequent to her removal
and asked for the Court’s “protection,” raising concerns that she was deported to Mexico without
financial resources or her passport. [doc. #25]. However, the Court has no authority to address

her requests, as her Petition is now moot.

Recommendation
For the reasons above, IT IS RECOMMENDED that Petitioner Patricia Alejandra
Rondon Hernandez’s Petition be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS MOOT.
Under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Rule 72(b), parties aggrieved by
this recommendation have fourteen (14) days from service of this Report and Recommendation
to file specific, written objections with the Clerk of Court. A party may respond to another
party’s objections within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of any objections or
response to the district judge at the time of filing.
Failure to file written objections to the proposed factual findings and/or the
proposed legal conclusions reflected in this Report and Recommendation within fourteen
(14) days following the date of its service, or within the time frame authorized by Fed. R.
Civ. P. 6(b), shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking either the factual findings or the
legal conclusions accepted by the District Court, except upon grounds of plain error. See
Douglass vy. United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415 (5" Cir. 1996).
In Chambers, Monroe, Louisiana, this 6 day of January, 2026.

slate
Kayla DyeSic@lusky
United Statés Magistrate Judge

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11239316. Public record. Not legal advice.
