From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Threatt v. Birkett

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
May 21, 2007
Case Number: 07-CV-11592 (E.D. Mich. May. 21, 2007)

Opinion

Case Number: 07-CV-11592.

May 21, 2007


ORDER


I.

This is a prisoner civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is an inmate at the Standish Maximum Correctional Facility in Standish, Michigan. Plaintiff alleged that defendants have violated his right to due process because he has been placed on "modified access," which limits his ability to utilize the established prison grievance procedure. Plaintiff proceeded without prepayment of the filing fee in this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). The Court dismissed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), because it failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See Order of Summary Dismissal filed April 16, 2007. Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration and paper styled "Letter Motion to Amend Statement of Fact with Documents Attached." The Court denied the motion for reconsideration and denied the motion to amend as moot. See Order filed May 2, 2007.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) provides, in pertinent part:

Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that —
. . .
(B) the action or appeal —
. . .
(ii) fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted . . .

II.

Now before the Court are plaintiff's papers styled as follows:

— Motion for a Miscarriage of Justice or Correct the Error Made in Dismissing Entitled Case
— Motion to Amend Exhibits to Complaint to Show Retaliatory Acts by the Defendants
— The Prisoner's Rights Burdened by the Disrespect Rules

In all of these filings, plaintiff essentially asks the Court to reconsider the dismissal of the complaint. Having reviewed the papers, the Court finds no error in dismissing the complaint for failure to state a claim. As explained, placement on modified access does not raise a federal constitutional claim of retaliation. Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for miscarriage of justice and motion to amend are DENIED.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Threatt v. Birkett

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
May 21, 2007
Case Number: 07-CV-11592 (E.D. Mich. May. 21, 2007)
Case details for

Threatt v. Birkett

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY THREATT, Plaintiff, v. THOMAS BIRKETT, ET AL., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

Date published: May 21, 2007

Citations

Case Number: 07-CV-11592 (E.D. Mich. May. 21, 2007)