Konrath v. Superintendent

Filing 7

OPINION AND ORDER: This case is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction. Signed by Judge Rudy Lozano on 1/19/2017. cc: Konrath (tc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
SOUTH BEND DIVISION
GREGORY KONRATH,
Petitioner,
vs.
SUPERINTENDENT,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CAUSE NO. 3:17-CV-49 RL

OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a habeas corpus petition
filed by Gregory Konrath, a pro se prisoner, in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Indiana on January 10,
2017, which was transferred here. For the reasons set forth below,
this case is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction.

DISCUSSION
Gregory Konrath, a pro se prisoner, filed a habeas corpus
petition challenging the prison disciplinary hearing (WCC 16-08144) where a disciplinary hearing officer (DHO) at the Westville
Correctional Facility found him guilty of Violating State Law in
violation of A-100. This is not the first time that Konrath has
brought a habeas corpus petition challenging that hearing. In
Konrath v. Superintendent, 3:16-CV-809 (N.D. Ind. filed November
25, 2016), he challenged this same proceeding. In that case, the

-1-

court dismissed the petition pursuant to Habeas Corpus Rule 4
because the ground presented was meritless. He again challenged it
in Konrath v. Superintendent, 3:17-CV-17 (N.D. Ind. filed January
3, 2017), where the court dismissed the petition as an unauthorized
successive petition.
As such, this is another unauthorized successive petition over
which

this

court

2244(b)(3)(A).
successive

“A

has

no

district

petition,

without

jurisdiction.
court

must

awaiting

See

dismiss
any

28
a

response

U.S.C.

§

second

or

from

the

government, unless the court of appeals has given approval for its
filing.”

Nunez v. United States, 96 F.3d 990, 991 (7th Cir. 1996)

(emphasis in original). Here, Konrath has still not obtained
authorization

from

the

Seventh

Circuit

to

file

a

successive

petition.

CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, this case is DISMISSED for
want of jurisdiction.
DATED: January 19, 2017

/s/RUDY LOZANO, Judge
United States District Court

-2-