Campbell v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

S.D. New York

Campbell v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

DecidedAugust 2, 2023

Docket1:23-cv-06723

StatusUnknown

This text of Campbell v. Federal Bureau of Prisons (Campbell v. Federal Bureau of Prisons) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Campbell v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK GEORGE/ROLAND CAMPBELL, Plaintiff, -against- 23-CV-6723 (LTS) FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE ORDER OF DISMISSAL EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK; THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL; JANE OR JOHN DOE, ET AL., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is currently incarcerated at F.C.I. Schuylkill, brings this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that he has been wrongly denied good conduct time credits. For the following reasons, the complaint is dismissed. Plaintiff has previously submitted to this court a substantially similar complaint against the same Defendants alleging the same claim. That case is pending in this court under docket number 23-CV-6526 (UA). Because this complaint raises the same claims, no useful purpose would be served by the filing and litigation of this duplicate lawsuit. Therefore, this complaint is dismissed without prejudice to Plaintiff’s pending case under docket number 23-CV-6526 (UA). In light of the Court’s belief that Plaintiff may have submitted this duplicate complaint in error, the Court directs the Clerk of Court not to charge Plaintiff the $350.00 filing fee for this action, and the Warden or Superintendent having custody of Plaintiff shall not deduct or encumber funds from Plaintiff’s prison trust account for this lawsuit. CONCLUSION The Court dismisses Plaintiff’s complaint as duplicative of 23-CV-6526 (UA). The Court directs the Clerk of Court not to charge Plaintiff the $350.00 filing fee for this action. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an

appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in this case. SO ORDERED. Dated: August 2, 2023 New York, New York

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK GEORGE/ROLAND CAMPBELL, Plaintiff, -against- 23-CV-6723 (LTS) FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE ORDER OF DISMISSAL EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK; THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL; JANE OR JOHN DOE, ET AL., Defendants. LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge: Plaintiff, who is currently incarcerated at F.C.I. Schuylkill, brings this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that he has been wrongly denied good conduct time credits. For the following reasons, the complaint is dismissed. Plaintiff has previously submitted to this court a substantially similar complaint against the same Defendants alleging the same claim. That case is pending in this court under docket number 23-CV-6526 (UA). Because this complaint raises the same claims, no useful purpose would be served by the filing and litigation of this duplicate lawsuit. Therefore, this complaint is dismissed without prejudice to Plaintiff’s pending case under docket number 23-CV-6526 (UA). In light of the Court’s belief that Plaintiff may have submitted this duplicate complaint in error, the Court directs the Clerk of Court not to charge Plaintiff the $350.00 filing fee for this action, and the Warden or Superintendent having custody of Plaintiff shall not deduct or encumber funds from Plaintiff’s prison trust account for this lawsuit. CONCLUSION The Court dismisses Plaintiff’s complaint as duplicative of 23-CV-6526 (UA). The Court directs the Clerk of Court not to charge Plaintiff the $350.00 filing fee for this action. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an

appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in this case. SO ORDERED. Dated: August 2, 2023 New York, New York

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN Chief United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Campbell v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/campbell-v-federal-bureau-of-prisons-nysd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack