From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jackson v. Williams

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Aug 4, 2016
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-1336 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 4, 2016)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-1336

08-04-2016

NEAL JACKSON, et al., Plaintiffs v. JASON WILLIAMS, et al., Defendants


( ) ORDER

Based on the report of Judge Carlson, (Doc. 2), to which no objections have been filed, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the report is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY. Plaintiffs' complaint, (Doc. 1), is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. See Roy v. Supreme Court of U.S., 484 F.App'x 700, 700 (3d Cir. 2012) (dismissal under Rule 8 is justified if the complaint is not comprehensible). Leave to amend is DENIED. The Clerk is directed to close the case.

On July 27, 2016, plaintiff filed a letter addressed to the clerk of court, (Doc. 5), with a copy of the first page of Judge Carlson's report attached. It appears that plaintiff is requesting a transfer from SCI-Huntingdon to SCI-Forest. This letter is not construed as an objection to the report nor is it titled as such. Regardless, it is well-settled law that prisoners have no inherent constitutional right to placement in any particular prison, to any security classification, or to any particular housing assignment. See

/s/ _________

MALACHY E. MANNION

United States District Judge Date: August 4, 2016

O:\Mannion\shared\ORDERS - DJ\CIVIL ORDERS\2016 ORDERS\16-1336-01.wpd

Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238, 245 (1983); Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215, 225 (1976); Montanye v. Haymes, 427 U.S. 236, 242 (1976).


Summaries of

Jackson v. Williams

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Aug 4, 2016
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-1336 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 4, 2016)
Case details for

Jackson v. Williams

Case Details

Full title:NEAL JACKSON, et al., Plaintiffs v. JASON WILLIAMS, et al., Defendants

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Aug 4, 2016

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-1336 (M.D. Pa. Aug. 4, 2016)

Citing Cases

Catanzano v. Hydinger

The bill being sufficient as for a cancellation of the forfeiture and a specific performance also entitled…