Jacobs v. Lappin

Full title: BEN F. JACOBS, Plaintiff, v. HARVEY LAPPIN, et al., Defendants

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Texas

Date published: Dec 4, 2006

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:04-CV-375 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 4, 2006)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:04-CV-375.

December 4, 2006

MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

MARCIA CRONE, District Judge

Plaintiff Ben F. Jacobs, a federal prisoner, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).

The Court ordered that this matter be referred to the Honorable Earl S. Hines, United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The magistrate judge recommends granting the defendants' motion for summary judgment.

The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge, along with the record, pleadings, and all available evidence. Plaintiff filed objections to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation.

The court has conducted a de novo review of the objections in relation to the pleadings and the applicable law. See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). Plaintiff contends that the defendants violated his right to due process by confining him in the Special Housing Unit for an extended period of time in violation of the Bureau of Prisons' regulations. Contrary to plaintiff's assertions, regulations concerning an inmate's placement and continued confinement in administrative segregation do not create a protectable liberty interest. Pichardo v. Kinker, 73 F.3d 612, 613 (5th Cir. 1996); see also Lair v. Purdy, 188 Fed. Appx. 250, 252 (5th Cir. 2006) (holding that the district court did not err in dismissing due process claim concerning plaintiff's placement and 420-day confinement in the Special Housing Unit). After careful consideration, the court concludes the objections are without merit.

ORDER

Accordingly, plaintiff's objections are OVERRULED. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct and the report of the magistrate judge is ADOPTED. The defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. A final judgment will be entered in this case in accordance with the magistrate judge's recommendation.