United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Ocala Division
WILLIAM F. JUNG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter comes before the Court following the Petitioner's
failure to respond to a show cause order (Dkt. 8) in this
proceeding brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Upon
review of the entire file, the Court concludes the case
should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to follow
this Court's orders.
Scott McCauley, proceeding pro se, is a federal
inmate who challenges prison disciplinary proceedings, which
resulted in the loss of good time credit and other sanctions.
Dkt. 1. In December 2017, the Court ordered Mr. McCauley
“to advise the Court in writing of any change in your
mailing address by filing a Notice of Change of Address . .
.[y]our failure to keep the Court advised of your current
address may result in the dismissal of your case.” Dkt.
3 ¶ 8. At no time has Mr. McCauley filed a notice that
his address has changed.
case moved forward, the response to the petition (Dkt.5) and
reply (Dkt. 6) were filed. In January 2019, this case was
reassigned to another district judge. Dkt. 7. A copy of that
order, which was mailed by the clerk's office to Mr.
McCauley, was “returned as undeliverable, unable to
identify.” The order was mailed to the Federal
Correctional Complex, United States Penitentiary Coleman I,
located in Sumter County, Florida (“Coleman”),
where he was housed when he filed the petition. Dkt. 1 at 1.
Coleman is the only address listed on this Court's
February 7, 2019, this Court issued a show cause order
directing as follows:
The record reflects that a recent correspondence sent to
Petitioner was returned as undeliverable. A review of the
Bureau of Prisons' website reflects that Petitioner has
been transferred to another penitentiary. The Court
previously warned Petitioner that the failure to advise the
Court of his current mailing address at all times may result
in the dismissal of this case without further notice. (Dkt.
3). . . . within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS of the
date of this Order, Petitioner is directed to show cause why
the case should not be dismissed. The failure to comply
within the allotted time will
result in the dismissal of this case without further notice.
Dkt. 8 (emphasis in original). The clerk's office mailed
a copy of the order to Mr. McCauley at Coleman. The mail was
not returned to the clerk as undeliverable.
Court must determine whether it has jurisdiction before
dismissing the case. Mr. McCauley is serving time for a 2012
conviction and sentence imposed by the United States District
Court for the Western District of Missouri, Central Division.
Dkt. 1 at 2. He was disciplined by the Bureau of Prisons
(“BOP”) in 2015 when he was housed at the Federal
Correctional Institution Texarkana (Low). Dkt. 1 at 2. At the
time he filed his petition in 2017, he was incarcerated at
Coleman. Dkt. 1. According to the BOP's website, McCauley
is now located at “Jesup FCI.”
over a petition seeking review of a prison disciplinary
proceeding under § 2241 lies in the “district of
confinement.” See Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542
U.S. 426, 447 (2004); Meriweather v. Augustine, No.
5:10-cv-236/RS/EMT, 2010 WL 5152979, at *1 (N.D. Fla. Nov.
22, 2010) (citing Padilla). “Only a court
inside the district where the prisoner is confined has
jurisdiction to grant relief pursuant to a § 2241
petition.” United States v. Saldana, 273
Fed.Appx. 845, 846 (11th Cir. 2008) (citation omitted). If
the prisoner is transferred to another federal penitentiary,
jurisdiction is not destroyed if the petition was properly
filed in the district court where the prisoner was confined
at the time of filing. See Dotson v. United States,
No. CV 312-004, 2013 WL 1786568, at *1 n.1 (S.D. Ga. Mar. 7,
2013) (citations omitted), adopted by 2013 WL
1786559 (S.D. Ga. Apr. 25, 2013); Burrell v.
English, No. 5:14-cv-207-MW-GRJ, 2016 WL 6496449, at *1
n.2 (N.D. Fla. Sept. 28, 2016), adopted by 2016 WL
6518638 (N.D. Fla. Nov. 1, 2016); Meriweather, 2010
WL 5152979, at *1 (citation omitted).
Eleventh Circuit law to this case, jurisdiction was acquired
by this Court when Mr. McCauley, who was housed at Coleman,
filed his § 2241 petition. Even though he may have been
transferred to a federal institution located outside this
district, subsequent transfers do not defeat jurisdiction.
for Failure to Follow this Court's Orders
prosecuting this case, Mr McCauley is responsible for
complying with this Court's orders. He has failed to
adhere to two orders: the initial standing order that
required him to give notice of a change in address, and the
show cause order of February 2019 for failure to provide a
change of address. Dkts. 3, 8. Neither order was returned as
undeliverable mail. There is a presumption that an item
properly mailed was received by the ...