BEALS v. BUTTS

Filing 20

ENTRY - The petitioner's objection to the respondent's motion to submit evidence under seal 19 is treated as a motion to reconsider the order granting that motion. Therefore, his motion to reconsider 19 is denied. (SEE ENTRY). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 1/25/2013. (copy to Petitioner via US Mail) (JKS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
KYLE BEALS,
Petitioner,
v.
KEITH BUTTS,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 1:12-cv-1357-JMS-MJD

ENTRY
The petitioner’s objection to the respondent’s motion to submit evidence
under seal [19] is treated as a motion to reconsider the order granting that motion.
See Patel v. Gonzales 442 F.3d 1011, 1015-1016 (7th Cir. 2006) (“A motion to
reconsider asks that a decision be reexamined in light of additional legal
arguments, a change of law, or an argument that was overlooked earlier . . . .”). The
petitioner first contends that the Report of Investigation was not entered into
evidence as part of the disciplinary hearing at issue in this case. This contention is
not persuasive because, as noted in the respondent’s brief, the conduct report does
refer to an attached Report of Investigation. The petitioner’s further argument that
information obtained for the Report of Investigation was done so in violation of his
constitutional rights is not material given the court’s limited scope of review in this
habeas action. Therefore, his motion to reconsider [19] is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________________________

01/25/2013
Date: _________________________
Distribution:
Kyle Beals
No. 881294
Pendleton Correctional Facility
4490 West Reformatory Road
Pendleton, IN 46064
[e-mail]

Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana