No. 21-6773

In Re Robert L. Hedrick

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2022-01-07
Status: Dismissed
Type: IFP
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: civil-procedure due-process federal-rules-of-civil-procedure pleadings rule-8(a) standing
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw HabeasCorpus Punishment Privacy
Latest Conference: 2022-05-26 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. Did the Court Error in ruling that "the complaint failed
to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)?

2. Did the Court Error in ruling that "Plaintiff, instead
makes several conclusory, fantastical, and nonsensical allegations,
which are insufficient to state a constitution claim, in light of
the FACT that on December 30, 2020 (Appendix A.) Hedrick's conviction
was overturned (VACATED) by the United States Court of Appeals for
the Fifth Circuit?

3. Did the Court Error in ruling to dismiss "...plaintiff's
claims arising at the Federal Correctional Institution Fort Dix,
for improper venue." when in fact the assaults on Hedrick occured
at all facilities that Hedrick has bean incarcerated at since FCI Victorville to and including FCI Fort Dix.

4. Was the Bureau of Prisons ("B0P") in DEFAULT of its
Administrative Remedies Program (aka 8,9,1.0,11, tort claim) system
by "failing to respond" in accordance with the Programs "TIME
LIMITS" to respond to. Hedrick's complaints?

5. Did the Court violate Hedrick's Eighth Amendment rights
to "access to the courts" and was Hedrick subjected to "cruel and
unusual punishment" with "deliberate indifference" by the BOP officer's who are the subject matter of Hedrick's BP-8, BP-9, .BP-10,
BP-11 and Tort Claim for Default Judgement?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the Court Error in ruling that the 'complaint failed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)?

Docket Entries

2022-05-31
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner DENIED.
2022-05-10
Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/26/2022.
2022-04-28
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner.
2022-02-28
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of mandamus is dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
2022-02-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/25/2022.
2022-01-14
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-12-13
Petition for a writ of mandamus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 7, 2022)

Attorneys

In Re Robert L. Hedrick
Robert L. Hedrick — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent