Reid v. Samuels

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

GORDON C. REID, ) )

Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civ. Action No. 15-0375-RMC )

CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR., ) )

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff Gordon C. Reid has sued the Director of the United States Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) for declaratory, injunctive and mandamus relief. Mr. Reid states that “at various intervals” since 2008, he been housed in Special Housing Units (“SHU”) at various BOP facilities. Compl. [Dkt. 1] at 2. He alleges that while in the SHUs, prison officials allegedly violated BOP regulations by depriving him of subscription magazines, outside exercise “for minor transgressions,” and meaningful access to administrative remedies. Id. at 3. Defendant has moved to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment [Dkt. 14], and Mr. Reid has cross moved for summary judgment [Dkt. 23]. 1

In its Reply filed on July 21, 2016, Defendant stresses that this action is moot because “for the past straight year,” Mr. Reid has not been “confined to the Special Housing Units that gave rise to [his] claims.” Reply [Dkt. 25] at 2. Mr. Reid has asserted nothing to the contrary, and he has not alleged similar wrongdoing by prison officials at his current facility in Coleman, Florida. “Normally, a prisoner’s transfer or release from a prison moots any claim he might have for equitable relief arising out of the conditions of his confinement in that prison.” Scott v. District of Columbia, 139 F.3d 940, 941 (D.C. Cir. 1998); see Cameron v. Thornburgh, 983 F.3d 253, 257 (D.C. Cir. 1993) (noting that prisoner’s “impending transfer” rendered claim for injunctive relief moot). And in the absence of “a cognizable cause of action,” a plaintiff has “no basis upon which to seek declaratory relief.” Ali v. Rumsfeld, 649 F.3d 762, 778 (D.C. Cir. 2011). Consequently, this action will be dismissed. 2

Date: November 8, 2016 __________/s/________________ ROSEMARY M. COLLYER United States District Judge