Hatten v. Bledsoe

Filing 10

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - AND NOW, this 24th day of July, 2012, upon con. of the report 5 of the mag. judge, filed 5/30/12, & plf.'s objs. 8 ...it is ordered that: 1. The mag. judge's report is adopted. 2. The 28 USC 2241 petn. 1 is dism'd. for lack of jurisdiction. 3. The Clerk of Crt. shall close this file. Signed by Honorable William W. Caldwell on 7/24/12. (am, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
TIMOTHY HATTEN,
Petitioner
vs.
BRYAN A. BLEDSOE,
Respondent

:
:
:
: CIVIL NO. 1:CV-12-772
:
:
:
:
:

ORDER

AND NOW, this 24th day of July, 2012, upon consideration of the report
(Doc. 5) of the magistrate judge, filed May 30, 2012, and Plaintiff’s objections (Doc. 8)
thereto, and upon independent review of the record, it is ordered that:
1. The magistrate judge’s report is adopted.
2. The 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition (Doc. 1) is dismissed for
lack of jurisdiction.
3. The Clerk of Court shall close this file.1

/s/William W. Caldwell
William W. Caldwell
United States District Judge

1

In his objections, Petitioner asserts he should be able to file this 2241 petition
because the cases he relies on had not been decided when he filed his 28 U.S.C. § 2255
motion in 2000. That fact is not enough to satisfy section 2255's safety-valve provision. In
any event, the cases were decided before the 2255 motion was filed.