ROUDABUSH v. HOLLINGSWORTH
OPINION FILED. Signed by Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 8/6/15. (js)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
James L. Roudabush, Jr.
J. Hollingsworth, Warden,
CIV. ACTION NO. 15-5906(RMB)
BUMB, U.S. District Judge
Plaintiff, a prisoner confined at FCI Fort Dix, submitted a
Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF
No. 1.) Petitioner alleged his health, life and safety are in danger,
and he is being abused, harassed and discriminated against in a
conspiracy to punish him for his sexual orientation, and in
retaliation for his civil actions in federal court. (ECF No. 1.)
Petitioner’s claims involve the conditions of his confinement,
and do not challenge the execution of his sentence. A finding in
Petitioner’s favor on these claims would not alter his sentence or
undo his conviction. See Leamer v. Fauver, 288 F.3d 532, 542 (3d Cir.
2002) (“when the challenge is to a condition of confinement such that
a finding in plaintiff's favor would not alter his sentence or undo
his conviction, an action under § 1983 [or Bivens] is appropriate.”)
Therefore, in the accompanying Order filed herewith, this Court will
dismiss the present petition for lack of jurisdiction. See Cardona
v. Bledsoe, 681 F.3d 533 (3d Cir. 2012) (district court correctly
dismissed § 2241 petition for lack of jurisdiction where petitioner
alleged his placement in prison’s Special Management Unit was
retaliation for his lawsuits). Petitioner may reopen this matter by
submitting either the $400 filing fee for a civil rights action or
a properly completed in forma pauperis application, and a properly
completed prisoner civil rights complaint.1
s/Renée Marie Bumb
RENÉE MARIE BUMB
United States District Judge
Dated: August 6, 2015
If Plaintiff chooses to submit a prisoner civil rights complaint,
his complaint should not contain any claims that are duplicative of
claims in his pending Bivens actions.
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?