Watts v. Hastings
Filing
7
ORDER DISMISSING CASE without prejudice, the Clerk is directed to return the $5.00 filing fee to the Petitioner. If Watts wishes to proceed with his claims, he should do so pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Signed by Chief Judge Lisa G. Wood on 8/13/2014. (ca)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
BRUNSWICK DIVISION
RAYMOND K. WATTS, JR.,
Petitioner,
CIVIL ACTION NO.: CV214-106
LFIM
SUZANNE R. HASTINGS, Warden,
Respondent.
ORDER
Petitioner, Raymond K.. Wafts, Jr., an inmate at the Federal Satellite Low in Jesup,
Georgia, paid the filing fee and filed an action ostensibly pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
Petitioner's claims are for civil rights violations. Watts is not contesting the computation
of his earned time or the execution of his sentence, but is challenging the conditions of
his confinement. Such a suit must be brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and Bivens
v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). By
Order dated July 29, 2014, Watts was advised of this distinction. He was also advised
that if he desired to proceed with his claims he was obligated to pay the filing fee of
$350.00. Watts was further advised that if he did not timely respond to that Order this
action would be dismissed without prejudice. Petitioner has responded to that Order,
without paying the remainder of the filing fee or moving to proceed in forma pauperis,
asserting that his claims are proper under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. This action is DISMISSED,
without prejudice. The Clerk is authorized and directed to return the $5.00 filing fee to
AO 72A
(Rev. 8/82)
Petitioner. If Watts wishes to proceed with his claims, he should do so pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1331 and Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388
(1971).
SO ORDERED, this
~//
day of
2014.
LISA GODBEWQStJ, CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
2
AO 72A
(Rev. 8182)
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?