Virgil v. Campos

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6697 ROBERT E. VIRGIL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JUAN CAMPOS, Officer in Charge, Immigration and Naturalization Service; JOHN ASHCROFT, United States Attorney General, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CA-00-15-6-13AK) Submitted: August 28, 2001 Decided: October 15, 2001 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert E. Virgil, Appellant Pro Se. Anh-Thu P. Mai, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994), Robert E. Virgil filed this petition for habeas corpus relief in the district court, asking that he be considered for relief under § 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c) (1994; repealed 1996). The district court ordered the Board of Immigra- tion Appeals to reconsider Virgil’s application in light of Tasios v. INS, 204 F.3d 544 (4th Cir. 2000), and 8 C.F.R. § 3.44 (2000). See also INS v. St. Cyr, U.S. , 60 U.S.L.W. 4510 (U.S. June 25, 2001) (No. 00-767). Virgil appealed the district court’s order. The Government now suggests that the appeal is moot, in view of the fact that Virgil has received the relief he sought: consideration before the immigration judge of his § 212(c) appli- cation, and a bond reduction. Having reviewed the case thoroughly, we agree that the appeal is moot. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998) (throughout the litigation the plaintiff must have an actual injury likely to be redressed by a favorable decision of the court). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 2