In re J.C. CA2/5

Filed 11/16/15 In re J.C. CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

In re J.C., a Person Coming Under the B262862 Juvenile Court Law. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. DK08840)

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

A.G.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Connie Quinones, Judge. Dismissed. Michelle Ben-Hur for Defendant and Appellant. Mary C. Wickham, Interim County Counsel, Dawyn R. Harrison, Assistant County Counsel, and Jessica S. Mitchell, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

The mother, A.G., appeals from a dispositional order in a dependency matter. The mother’s sole contention is that she should not have been excluded from the family home. This had the functional effect of a removal order which prevented her from living with her two children. While the appeal was pending, the removal order was vacated and the children were placed in the home of both parents. In response to this state of affairs, the Department of Children and Family Services moved on April 11, 2015, to dismiss the appeal on mootness grounds. Initially, counsel for the mother opposed the dismissal motion. However, on September 21, 2015, as the children had returned to the mother’s physical custody, her opposition to the dismissal motion was withdrawn. We agree with the parties that we have no jurisdiction over this matter because all of the mother’s contentions are now moot. (Eye Dog Foundation v. State Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind (1967) 67 Cal.2d 536, 541; In re B.L. (2012) 204 Cal.App.4th 1111, 1118; In re Melissa R. (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 24, 34; In re B.D. (2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 1218, 1240-1241; In re Karen G. (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 1384, 1390; In re Albert G. (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 132, 135; In re Dani R. (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 402, 405-406; In re Jessica K. (2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 1313, 1315-1316.) The appeal is dismissed. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS