January 23, 2020, the petitioner initiated a civil action within the U.s. District Court for the Northern District of Maryland asserting adenial of the right to petition the government for redress, access to the Due Process violations and unreasonable courts , strip searches of the petitoner 1s person , by the respondents Wexford Health Sources Inc., Jane & John Doe, Who are a medical service provider and their staff. as well as Loyns, Nines, Webb and Morgan, all members employed by the Department of .Public Safety & Correctional Services, (DPSCS/DOC). The pleadings was re-filed and the case officially proceeded on February 3, 2020.

The matter stems from a hospital appointment scheduled on December 16, 2015, that collided with the time period the had xn which to file petitioner his response m a pending Wrongful Death suit. The DOC defendants have a policy that prevented the petitioner from carrying any legal materials or items of that nature with him during any hospital visits. The petitioner ,apparently missed the court deadline to respond when prison officials failed to bring him back, and instead, left him at another facility over the weekend without his legal documents. The civil matter was active witnin the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, Charleston Division.

The hand presents case at several fundamental questions of the court's interpretation concerning the types of civil actions a prisoner is prevented from litigating, that would fall within the purview of a denial of access to the' courts. as stated from a history of the court's established decisions in Christopher v. Harbury , 536 U.S. 403, 414, 416 n. 13, li!2 S.Ct. 2179 (2002); Lewis , 518 U.S. 343, 351-53, 116 S.Ct. 2174 (1996), & Bounds, 430 U.S. 817, 828, r ( 1977 ) .

The second, relates to the interpretation of this court's precedents in Bell, . 441 U.S. 520, 545-46 ( 1979 ) ,as to the reasonableness of multiple strip while remaining under constant supervision. searches , and the ability to contest or challenge a sealed regulation filed in support.

Another concerns a unique exceptional or extraordinary circumstances inthe tolling of a civil action against one of the parties associated.

The questions presented is of great importance, as it would give guidance on a number of the issues.

The importance of one of the issues is further anhancea by til e I owe r court 1s inaccurate interpretation ' of Lewis , wtiere the court concluded that a prisoners'. Wrongful Death Suit that was impeded by prison officials, did not deny access to the This matter would affect a prisoners' ability courts . to determine whether he can bring these types of civil actions on the behalf of a deceased relative and otner without interference by prison such cases officials with no form of relief.

The searches. is of public importance and affects the operation of the prison and what constitutes an excessive or unreasonable strip search while under constant supervision. .

The sealed documents, isof great public importance. as it infringes on due process and compulsory process and burdens a prisoners ability to challenge certain regulations prison officials use in their defense.

The questions presented for this court" to consider are:

1. Can a Prisoner state a claim for Denial of Access to the Court, if Prison Officials Impeded his ability to litigate a pending Wrongful Death Suit

Can a prisoner state a claim for denial of access to the courts if prison officials impeded their ability to litigate a pending wrongful death suit?