Professional Documents
Culture Documents
TOOLASPRASHAD v. BUREAU OF PRISONS Et Al - Document No. 14
TOOLASPRASHAD v. BUREAU OF PRISONS Et Al - Document No. 14
TOOLASPRASHAD v. BUREAU OF PRISONS Et Al - Document No. 14
14
Case 1:04-cv-03219-JBS-JBR Document 14 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 1 of 13
LATCHMIE TOOLASPRASHAD, :
: Civil Action No. 04-3219 (JBS)
Plaintiff, :
:
v. : OPINION
:
BUREAU OF PRISONS, et al., :
:
Defendants. :
APPEARANCES:
presumed. This matter comes before the Court upon the submission
Dockets.Justia.com
Case 1:04-cv-03219-JBS-JBR Document 14 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 2 of 13
Fort Dix, New Jersey, defendant Dr. Drew Kerr, repeatedly assured
Petersburg, Virginia.
at FCI Fort Dix could have prepared the report, which would have
been more beneficial for Plaintiff because the staff there knew
2
Case 1:04-cv-03219-JBS-JBR Document 14 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 3 of 13
Plaintiff that she did not want to see him in the law library
occasions, went to the law library and took Plaintiff out of the
deprived.2
1
As Plaintiff does not seek any relief with respect to
these events, the Court previously construed these allegations as
mere background information and not as a claim that Dr. Pugh
deprived Plaintiff of his right of access to the courts.
Plaintiff does not challenge that construction of the Complaint.
2
Again, as Plaintiff does not seek relief with respect to
these events, the Court previously construed these allegations as
background information and not as an attempt to state a claim for
3
Case 1:04-cv-03219-JBS-JBR Document 14 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 4 of 13
Plaintiff was again denied parole and that denial was upheld on
deny him parole. Plaintiff contends that the Commission did not
His requests were denied at all levels of review within the BOP.
4
Case 1:04-cv-03219-JBS-JBR Document 14 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 5 of 13
and Dr. Pugh, (2) a new parole hearing giving “equal weight” to
new psychological report at FCI Ft. Dix, where the staff are
3
To the extent this Motion could be construed as a motion
for reconsideration under either Local Rule 7.1(i) or Federal
Rule 59(e), it is untimely.
5
Case 1:04-cv-03219-JBS-JBR Document 14 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 6 of 13
Proceedings.”
and (g)(4).
ANALYSIS
part:
Sec’y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 572 F.2d 976, 977 (3d Cir.
6
Case 1:04-cv-03219-JBS-JBR Document 14 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 7 of 13
262, 271 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 947 (2002)).
(citations omitted).
Stradley v. Cortez, 518 F.2d 488, 493 (3d Cir. 1975). A motion
7
Case 1:04-cv-03219-JBS-JBR Document 14 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 8 of 13
Virgin Islands, 562 F.2d 908, 911 (3d Cir. 1977) (citations
omitted).
8
Case 1:04-cv-03219-JBS-JBR Document 14 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 9 of 13
Gowan v. U.S. Dept. of Air Force, 148 F.3d 1182, 1187-88 (10th
187 F.3d 348, 360-61 (4th Cir. 1999) (holding that where doctor
debate, they are not subject to alteration under the Privacy Act
Widnall, 1997 WL 176394 (10th Cir. Apr. 14, 1997) (holding that
cert. denied, 479 U.S. 885 (1986) (OPM did not violate Privacy
9
Case 1:04-cv-03219-JBS-JBR Document 14 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 10 of 13
607 F.Supp. 697 (N.D. Cal. 1985) (the provisions for amending
legislative proceedings).
Deters v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 85 F.3d 655, 657 (D.C. Cir. 1996)
37 (D.C. Cir. 1987) and Rose v. United States, 905 F.2d 1257,
feasible, necessary, and proper, for the agency and, in turn, the
10
Case 1:04-cv-03219-JBS-JBR Document 14 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 11 of 13
(quoting Doe v. United States, 821 F.2d 694, 699-701 (D.C. Cir.
1987) and Sellers v. Bureau of Prisons, 959 F.2d 307, 311 (D.C.
Cir. 1992)).
did not credit Dr. Schwartz’s opinion to the same degree as the
11
Case 1:04-cv-03219-JBS-JBR Document 14 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 12 of 13
damages.
12
Case 1:04-cv-03219-JBS-JBR Document 14 Filed 09/13/2006 Page 13 of 13
II. CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, the Motion must be denied.
Plaintiff has failed to establish any grounds for relief from the
s/ Jerome B. Simandle
Jerome B. Simandle
United States District Judge
13