Alfredo Leyva v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: April 23, 2024
• Docket: 22-7471
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7471 Doc: 21 Filed: 04/23/2024 Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-7471

ALFREDO BELTRAN LEYVA,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS (BOP); MICHAEL CARVAJAL, individually and as the Director of the BOP; JAMES PETRUCCI, individually and as the Mid-Atlantic Regional Director of the BOP; CATRICIA HOWARD, individually and as an Assistant Director Corrections Program Division of the BOP; MICHAEL FACEY, individually and as a Hearing Officer of the BOP; LINDA GETER, individually and as the Chief of the Designation and Sentence Computation Center of the BOP; RICHARD HUDGINS, individually and as the Complex Warden- Hazelton of the BOP; STANLEY LOVETT, JR., individually and as the Complex Warden-Hazelton of the BOP; LIEUTENANT VINCENT CRUZ, individually and as a member of Special Investigative Services at USP Hazelton, BOP; JOHN/JANE DOE 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, employees of the BOP,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (5:22-cv-00142-JPB-JPM)

Submitted: March 20, 2024 Decided: April 23, 2024

Before KING and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. USCA4 Appeal: 22-7471 Doc: 21 Filed: 04/23/2024 Pg: 2 of 4

ON BRIEF: Linda George, LINDA GEORGE, ATTORNEY AT LAW, Hackensack, New Jersey, for Appellant. Morgan S. McKee, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia; Erin K. Reisenweber, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 USCA4 Appeal: 22-7471 Doc: 21 Filed: 04/23/2024 Pg: 3 of 4

PER CURIAM:

Alfredo Beltran Leyva appeals from the district court’s order granting summary

judgment to Defendants * and dismissing his amended civil action. Leyva challenges the

grant of judgment to Defendants on his fourth cause of action requesting the issuance of a

writ of mandamus against the Bureau of Prisons. Leyva argues he is entitled to mandamus

relief and that the district court’s ruling was premature, since it issued before the

commencement of discovery. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we find

no abuse of discretion in the timing of the district court’s decision. See Shaw v. Foreman,

59 F.4th 121, 128-29 (4th Cir. 2023).

We review de novo the district court’s denial of the relief Leyva requested in his

fourth cause of action. See Smith v. CSRA, 12 F.4th 396, 402 (4th Cir. 2021);

Marquez-Ramos v. Reno, 69 F.3d 477, 479 (10th Cir. 1995). A plaintiff may be entitled to

mandamus relief where he demonstrates “he has a clear and indisputable right to the relief

sought” and “the responding party has a clear duty to do the specific act requested.” United

States ex rel. Rahman v. Oncology Assocs., P.C., 198 F.3d 502, 511 (4th Cir. 1999). As

Leyva has not shown his clear entitlement to the specific relief he requested, we discern no

reversible error in the district court’s denial of his fourth cause of action.

* The district court’s order granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. Because the district court considered matters outside of the pleadings in making its rulings in this order, we treat the motion as one for summary judgment. Edelman v. Lynchburg Coll., 300 F.3d 400, 404 (4th Cir. 2002).

3 USCA4 Appeal: 22-7471 Doc: 21 Filed: 04/23/2024 Pg: 4 of 4

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED