
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alvira RIOS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 04-20694.
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Decided June 21, 2006.
    James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Molly E. Odom, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Alvira Rios, Houston, TX, pro se.
    Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The attorney appointed to represent Alvira Rios, former federal prisoner # 13646-074, has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396,18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Rios has not filed a response.

This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction on its own motion if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.1987). Article III, § 2 of the Constitution limits federal court jurisdiction to actual cases and controversies. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998). The ease-or-controversy requirement demands that “some concrete and continuing injury other than the now-ended incarceration or parole — some ‘collateral consequence’ of the conviction— must exist if the suit is to be maintained.” Id.

Rios has served the sentence that was imposed upon the revocation of her supervised release. The order revoking Rios’s term of supervised release imposed no further term of supervised release. Accordingly, there is no case or controversy for this court to address, and the appeal is dismissed as moot. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is denied as unnecessary.

MOTION DENIED AS UNNECESSARY; APPEAL DISMISSED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     