IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

DUBLIN DIVISION

EARL SMITH, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) CV 322-138 ) JERMAINE WHITE and COUNSELOR ) VERONICA STEWART, ) ) Respondents. ) _________

O R D E R _________ After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, to which objections have been filed. (Doc. no. 11.) On June 27, 2022, Petitioner submitted a “Petition for a Writ of Mandamus” seeking an order for Respondents to comply with Georgia Department of Corrections Standard Operating Procedures. Petitioner invoked

and cited in support two cases concerning writs of mandamus against federal judges. (Doc. no. 1, p. 6 (citing In re Corrugated Container Antitrust Litig.,

(5th Cir. 1980); United States v. Denson,

(5th Cir. 1979).) The Magistrate Judge appropriately recommended dismissal of the petition as seeking a writ of mandamus pursuant to

, which only provides for mandamus relief against federal officers. In his objections, Petitioner now claims he seeks a writ under

, which establishes federal jurisdiction over civil actions aiming to “redress the deprivation, under color of any State law . . . of any right, privilege or immunity secured by the Constitution of the United States or by any Act of Congress... .” Section 1343 does not create a private right of action. See Albra v. City of Fort Lauderdale,

(11th Cir. 2007) (per curiam). Thus, even if the Magistrate Judge had construed the petition in the way Petitioner now requests, this case would still be subject to dismissal. Accordingly, the Court OVERRULES Petitioner’s objections, ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as its opinion, DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE the petition for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and CLOSES this civil action. SO ORDERED this 30" day of November, 2022, at Augusta, Georgia.