United States District Court, D. South Carolina
F. ANDERSON, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
pro se petitioner is a federal prisoner formerly
housed at the Federal Correctional Institution
(“FCI”) in Edgefield, South Carolina. He seeks
relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, specifically
challenging an administrative disciplinary action he received
which originated while he was at FCI in Coleman, Florida. The
disciplinary hearing was ultimately reheard when petitioner
after he was moved to FCI Edgefield and following his appeal
through the Administrative Remedy process. Petitioner asserts
that the guilty finding was in error and that his due process
rights were violated at the rehearing. He seeks to have the
Incident Report No. 2965068 expunged and his Good Time
Credits (“GTC”) restored.
respondent has filed a motion to dismiss and memorandum in
response (ECF Nos. 10, 11), arguing that petitioner's
case is moot because he has already received the relief he
requested. Attached to the motion to dismiss is the
Declaration of Amy Williams, a legal assistant for the South
Carolina Consolidated Legal Center located at FCI Edgefield.
She avers that petitioner's disciplinary action for
Incident Report No. 2965068 has been expunged and the
petitioner's GTC has been restored. She notes that on
March 19, 2019, the petitioner's Sentence Monitoring
Computation Data from SENTRY was updated to reflect the
restoration of 27 days GTC.
Magistrate Judge assigned to this action issued an order
pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th
Cir. 1975) advising the petitioner that the motion to dismiss
had been filed, and the potential consequences if the
petitioner failed to adequately respond to the motion. The
petitioner, however, did not respond to the motion to
Magistrate Judge now has prepared a Report and Recommendation
and opines that the § 2241 petition should be dismissed
as moot because the disciplinary action in question has been
expunged by the Bureau of Prisons and the petitioner's
GTC of 27 days have been restored. The Report sets forth in
detail the relevant facts and standards of law on this
matter, and the court incorporates such without a recitation.
petitioner was advised of his right to file objections to the
Report and Recommendation, which was entered on the docket on
May 31, 2019. On June 10, 2019, the petitioner filed a notice
of change of address from Edgefield FCI to the Federal
Transfer Center in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. On June 20, 2019,
the Clerk re-mailed the Report to the petitioner at his new
15, 2019, the petitioner filed a one paragraph letter in
response to the Report:
I had a shot that was dismissed for C/A No. 4:19-226-JFA-TER.
On 3-19-2019 27 days good time was restored. I started with
250 GCT and I lost 41 GCT for a 112 use of drugs/alcohol. I
should have 209 GCT left, but it got me for 204 GCT. I am
missing 5 GCT. I'm at Beaumont Low.
(ECF No. 20 at 1).
petitioner acknowledges that 27 days of GTC was restored.
However, he suggests that he is still missing 5 hours of GTC.
Those alleged missing 5 hours do not appear to relate to the
matter that was raised in the original § 2241 petition
and should be addressed with the Bureau of Prisons.
Magistrate Judge correctly notes that a case becomes moot
when the issues presented are no longer live or the parties
lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome. See
Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 89 S.Ct. 1944 (1969);
Friedman's, Inc. v. Dunlap, 290 F.3d 191 (4th
Cir. 2002). Based on the respondent's declaration, the 27
hours of GTC were restored and the disciplinary action
(#2965068) was expunged by the respondent. Thus, the
petitioner's claims in his original § 2241 petition
are now moot.
careful review of the record, the applicable law, and the
Report and Recommendation, the court accepts the Magistrate
Judge's recommendation as proper and incorporates it
herein by reference. Accordingly, the respondent's motion
to dismiss (ECF No. 10) is granted and the petition is
dismissed as moot.