The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
MICHAEL ANTHONY WEAVER, )
)
PETITIONER, )
)
v. ) Civ. No. 13-cv-1622 (KBJ)
)
JOSEPH PETTIFORD, Deputy Warden, )
)
RESPONDENT. )
)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In October of 2013, pro se Petitioner Michael Anthony Weaver (“Petitioner”)
filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus in which he challenged the legality of a
supervised release violation warrant that the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Virginia allegedly issued in 2010, but which had never been executed. (Pet. for a
Writ of Habeas Corpus, ECF No. 1 (“Petition”), at 5). Before the Court at present is the
United States’ motion to dismiss the Petition, in which it argues that this action is moot
because “the violation warrant has been executed, the supervised release violation
petition has been dismissed, and the petitioner has been released from custody.” (Mot.
to Dismiss, ECF No. 5, at 1.)
The Court advised Petitioner of his obligations under the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure and the local rules of this Court to respond to the motion, and specifically
warned Petitioner that, if he did not respond to the motion by May 14, 2014, the Court
could treat the motion as conceded. (Order, ECF No. 6, at 1-2). 1 To date, the Petitioner
has neither filed an opposition to the motion, nor requested more time to file his
1
The Court clerk mailed the order to the plaintiff at the last known address on file. Under Local Civil Rule
5.19(c)(1), litigants are required to advise the Court of any change of address.
opposition, nor advised the Court of any change of address. The Court, therefore, will
grant the United States’ motion as conceded and will DISMISS this action. An Order
accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
Date: June 19, 2014 Ketanji Brown Jackson
KETANJI BROWN JACKSON
United States District Judge