The Washtenaw County prosecutor’s office is not reviewing possible charges against former Michigan kicker Brendan Gibbons, who was expelled from the university last month after it said he had violated its Student Sexual Misconduct Policy.

The violation stemmed from an alleged sexual misconduct incident Nov. 22, 2009, for which Gibbons was never charged. Gibbons was a redshirt freshman that year on the football team. He was in graduate school and had completed his football eligibility — with the exception of the bowl game — when he was expelled.

Gibbons was informed of his expulsion in a letter sent Dec. 19, 2013, and mailed to his home address in Florida from the University’s Office of Student Conflict Resolution, which handles disciplinary proceedings against students. The letter was reviewed by the Michigan Daily, which first reported the story on Tuesday. In the letter, he was informed he would be “permanently separated” from the university on Dec. 20. The Daily indicated it did not obtain the documents from the university.

In the legal realm, though, Gibbons likely will not face further proceedings.

“We have not received a request for prosecution for anyone with this name,” Steve Hiller, Washtenaw County chief assistant prosecutor, said Wednesday.

The Washtenaw County prosecutors office does not conduct investigations. At the end of a police investigation, a request for prosecution can then be submitted to the office.

Gibbons did not travel to Arizona last month for Michigan’s bowl game in Tempe on Dec. 28. Upon the team’s arrival, Michigan coach Brady Hoke announced that Gibbons had returned home to Florida for “a family matter” and would not participate in the game.

In a letter from the University’s Office of Student Conflict Resolution sent Nov. 20, 2013, and obtained by The Daily, the university determined a “preponderance of evidence supports a finding that the Respondent engaged in unwanted or unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature, committed without valid consent.”

The Office of Institutional Equity, which reviews internal complaints of sexual assault at Michigan, does not, according to the Daily, require the same standard of evidence of criminal prosecutors. The Daily surmises that perhaps because of revised university policies regarding sexual misconduct, the initial allegation was reviewed or re-reviewed, hence the lengthy review delay.

In the updated policy effective in 2011, any sexual misconduct allegation received by U-M must be investigated.

Jay Wilgus, director of the office of Student Conflict Resolution, directed an interview request to Rick Fitzgerald, associate director of U-M public affairs.

The university, through Fitzgerald, issued a statement Wednesday evening.

“Questions have been raised about the University of Michigan’s response to allegations of sexual misconduct in 2009,” the statement said. “Those allegations were handled in accordance with the university policy in effect at the time.

“The university now adheres to the institution’s policy on sexual misconduct by students, which was adopted in 2013. The Office for Institutional Equity is the designated university office for conducting investigations into allegations of sexual misconduct involving students. In implementing university policy, OIE treats all students equally and conducts fair and impartial investigations.

“Our current process allows that, if new information is obtained at a later point, the university could commence an investigation at that time. In accordance with the university’s policy of not disclosing details about student disciplinary actions, we will not release the results of any investigation. The university does produce and publish annual reports on aggregate student disciplinary sanctions through the Office of Student Conflict Resolution.”

It is unclear whether the alleged victim requested that the incident be reviewed.

According to the policy, that’s not entirely necessary.

“If the Complainant is willing to participate in the review and investigation process, the University will proceed as described in the Investigation section.

“If the Complainant requests confidentiality or asks that the report of sexual misconduct not be pursued, the University will, generally before taking any further investigative steps, forward that information, along with all available information about the report, to a review panel. The review panel will consist of the Title IX Coordinator and staff members. These panel members will represent the interests of the University, law enforcement, survivors of sexual misconduct, persons accused of sexual misconduct, and/or other offices as deemed necessary and appropriate under the circumstances.”