Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
YESSEL CANTILLO-CASTELLANOS,
Petitioner,
v. No. 2:26-cv-00093-SMD-GJF
MARKWAYNE MULLIN,1 et al.,
Respondents.
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
(Doc. 1), and Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss Petition (Doc. 14). The Court has reviewed the
parties’ submissions, the record, and the relevant law, and for the reasons set forth below, the
Motion to Dismiss Petition is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED
as MOOT.
BACKGROUND
Petitioner Yessel Cantillo Castellanos, a citizen of Cuba, was detained at the Otero County
Processing Center while his asylum application was pending. Doc. 1 at 2. Petitioner was paroled
into the United States on September 29, 2022. Id. ¶ 15. After the parole expired, Petitioner alleges
that the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) affirmatively permitted him to remain at
liberty in the United States. Id. ¶ 17. Nevertheless, Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(“ICE”) detained Petitioner pending the asylum application’s outcome. Id. ¶ 24.
Respondents subsequently moved to dismiss the Petition, asserting that Petitioner was
released from custody on February 25, 2026. Doc. 14 at 1. An immigration judge dismissed the
1 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), the case caption shall be updated to reflect that Markwayne Mullin
is the Secretary of Homeland Security.
Case 2:26-cv-00093-SMD-GJF Document 15 Filed 04/16/26 Page 1 of 3

2
underlying removal proceedings against Petitioner after finding Petitioner entitled to admission to
the United States. See Doc. 14-1. Both parties waived appeal. Doc. 14 at 1. Respondents argue
that the Petition should be dismissed as moot due to these changed circumstances, and Petitioner
has not submitted a reply in opposition. Id. at 2.
DISCUSSION
“Mootness is a threshold issue because the existence of a live case or controversy is a
constitutional prerequisite to federal court jurisdiction.” Disability Law Ctr. v. Millcreek Health
Ctr., 428 F.3d 992, 996 (10th Cir. 2005) (quoting McClendon v. City of Albuquerque, 100 F.3d
863, 867 (10th Cir. 1996)). “Without a live, concrete controversy, we lack jurisdiction to consider
claims no matter how meritorious.” Habecker v. Town of Estes Park, 518 F.3d 1217, 1223 (10th
Cir. 2008) (quoting Mink v. Suthers, 482 F.3d 1244, 1253 (10th Cir. 2007)).
Section 2241 provides a remedy when a petitioner is “in custody in violation of the
Constitution or laws . . . of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3). Accordingly, the sole issue
before the Court is the constitutional sufficiency of Petitioner’s detention. Because Petitioner has
been released following the grant of asylum, his claims are now moot, and there remains no further
remedy for the Court to grant.
Case 2:26-cv-00093-SMD-GJF Document 15 Filed 04/16/26 Page 2 of 3

3
CONCLUSION
It is hereby ORDERED that Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 14) is GRANTED,
and Petitioner’s Petitioner for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is DENIED as MOOT.
____________________________________
SARAH M. DAVENPORT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:26-cv-00093-SMD-GJF Document 15 Filed 04/16/26 Page 3 of 3