The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAFAYETTE DIVISION
MARIA LUISA SANTANA CIVIL DOCKET NO. 6:26-CV-645-P
CONTRERAS
VERSUS JUDGE TERRY A. DOUGHTY
TODD M. LYONS, ET AL. MAGISTRATE JUDGE HORNSBY
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
In accordance with the standing order of this court, this matter was referred to the
undersigned Magistrate Judge for review, report and recommendation.
STATEMENT OF CLAIM
Before the court is a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed on behalf of Maria
Luisa Santana Contreras (“Petitioner”), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2241. At the time of filing
this petition, Petitioner, an alleged native and citizen of Mexico, was an immigration
detainee at the South Louisiana ICE Processing Center in Basile, Louisiana. Petitioner
sought release from detention or a bond hearing.
Petitioner entered the United States in 2012. Subsequently, Petitioner was taken
into immigration custody (Doc. 1). Petitioner was deported from the United States on
March 6, 2026 (Doc 5).
Petitioner filed a Motion for Order to Show Cause. In said Motion, Petitioner
requests that this court (1) direct Respondents to explain why Petitioner was removed
while her habeas petition was pending; (2) direct Respondents to address whether
Petitioner can be returned to the United States to pursue her habeas claims; and (3) grant
any other relief that is just and proper (Doc. 5).
Because Petitioner has been removed and is no longer in ICE custody, her petition
should be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE because the court lacks jurisdiction and
her Motion for Order to Show Cause should be DENIED.
LAW AND ANALYSIS
Article III of the Constitution includes a case or controversy requirement for matters
brought in the federal courts. This means that the plaintiff or 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. Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 110 S.Ct. 1249, 1253
(1990). Petitioner must continue to meet the case or controversy requirement. Spencer v.
Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed. 2d 43 (1998). A case becomes moot “when
the issues presented are no longer ‘live’ or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in
the outcome.” United States Parole Comm'n v. Geraghty, 445 U.S. 388, 396 (1980)
(quoting Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 496 (1969)). Petitioner’s petition
challenging her detention is moot because she has been removed and is no longer in ICE
custody. See Dormeus v. Keisler, 252 Fed.Appx. 611, 612 (5th Cir.2007). If a controversy
is moot, the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Carr v. Saucier, 582 F.2d 14, 16 (5th
Cir. 1978) (citing North Carolina v. Rice, 404 U.S. 244, 246 (1971); Locke v. Board of
Public Instruction, 499 F.2d 359, 363-364 (5th Cir. 1974)).
Accordingly, IT IS RECOMMENDED that Petitioner’s petition be DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and Petitioner’s Motion
for Order to Show Cause (Doc. 5) be DENIED.
OBJECTIONS
Under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C) and Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 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, unless an
extension of time is granted under Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 6(b). A party may respond to another
party’s objections within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof.
Counsel are directed to furnish a courtesy copy of any objections or responses to the
District Judge at the time of filing.
A party’s failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions and
recommendation set forth above, within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy
shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the
unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district
court. See Douglas v. U.S.A.A., 79 F.3d 1415 (Sth Cir. 1996) (en banc).
THUS DONE AND SIGNED, in chambers, at Shreveport, Louisiana, on this the
30" day of July 2026.
Mark L. Hornsby
U.S. Magistrate Judge
Page 3 of 3