STANLEY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

STANLEY CARL BURKHARDT CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS NO: 24-02353

U.S. BUREAU OF PRISONS, et al. SECTION: T (1)

ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Patrick Cook, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Hannah Givens, Residential Reentry Management, United States Attorney’s Office, United States Probation Office, and Joseph Zonno. R. Doc. 25. Plaintiff Stanley Carl Burkhardt has not filed a response; accordingly, the Motion is deemed to be unopposed. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is granted. Plaintiff pro se filed this suit pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics,

(1971), alleging that he was unlawfully over-detained at the Federal Correctional Institution in Butner, North Carolina (“FCI Butner”). R. Doc. 1, Complaint for Violation of Civil Rights, pp. 3-5. Plaintiff claims he was deprived of his due process rights and deprived of his liberty when he was allegedly held at FCI Butner for more than one year past his release date. Id. at pp. 5, 11. Plaintiff filed suit against three individual employees of FCI Butner, two federal agencies, a U.S. Attorney’s Office, and a Bureau of Prisons field office that manages the reentry of federal offenders into the community (the “Federal Defendants”). Id. at pp. 1 3-5. These Federal Defendants, more specifically the Federal Bureau of Prisons (erroneously referred to as “U.S. Bureau of Prisons”), Dr. Patrick Cook in his official capacity and individual capacity, Dr. Joseph Zonno in his official capacity and individual capacity, Residential Reentry Management, United States Probation Office EDLA, Hannah Givens in her official capacity and individual capacity, and the United States Attorney’s Office EDNC, now seek to dismiss Plaintiff's claims pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), Rule 12(b)(2), and Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as well as under

(e)(2)(B). The Court has reviewed the Motion, the applicable law, and the absence of a response from Plaintiff, and concludes the Motion to Dismiss has merit. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and Plaintiffs claims are dismissed with prejudice. The Court will enter judgment in favor of Defendants.

New Orleans, Louisiana, this 1st day of April 2025.

GREG GERARD GUIDRY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE