In re: Frederick Bank



Download PDF
Case: 16-4166 Document: 003112525893 Page: 1 CLD-113 Date Filed: 01/31/2017 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No. 16-4166 ____________ IN RE: FREDERICK H. BANKS, Petitioner __________________________________ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus __________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Fed. R. App. Pro. 21 January 26, 2017 Before: FISHER, SHWARTZ and GREENBERG, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: January 31, 2017) ____________ OPINION* ____________ PER CURIAM Petitioner, Frederick Banks, a federal prisoner at FCI-Butner, filed a document entitled “Petition for a Writ of Mandamus Against the Federal Bureau of Prisons.” For the following reasons, we will dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction. In his petition, Banks complains that an odor coming from the prison’s Food Service Department’s kitchen, which prison staff allegedly stated is emanating from the * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. Case: 16-4166 Document: 003112525893 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/31/2017 sewer, is making him “violently ill.” Banks seeks an order directing FCI-Butner, its Warden, and the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) “to repair or replace and correct the problems and pay damages to Banks.” We lack jurisdiction to grant the relief requested. The All Writs Act allows the issuance of writs “necessary or appropriate in aid of” our jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. § 1651. We are bound by the extent of our “subject-matter jurisdiction over the case or controversy.” United States v. Denedo, 556 U.S. 904, 911 (2009). As Banks asks, essentially, that we “compel an officer or employee of the United States or [an] agency thereof to perform a duty” he alleges is owed to him, original jurisdiction is vested in the District Court, not with us. See 28 U.S.C. § 1361; see also Massey v. United States, 581 F.3d 172, 174 (3d Cir. 2009) (where “a statute specifically addresses the particular issue at hand, it is that authority, and not the All Writs Act, that is controlling”). Accordingly we will dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?