Free USCA Mandate - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

l _"— .—..dL—
1 ‘ · Case 3:03-ct/-0026(FA\WT Document 16 Filed 04/28/2005 “P`age`·‘k;itfgCv
_1 W. ~ .VVV fl C . -—--7 AN ‘
l a _ Q , YL. ’ i ~ os-ev-260
1 _,,.i.,,_ ,,·§\_E· an e-.:». Thompson.!
· Untted States Court of Appeals
l sort rata
i _ SECOND CIRCUIT ‘
At a stated Term ofthe United States Court of Appeals for the Seco d
Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, Foley Square, n
the City of New York, on the /8 "` day of /%“*'¢*= two thousand and tive I
Present:
Hon. J on O. Newman, _ {
Hon. Rrehard C. Wesley, QMS COURTOF
I HOD. PSIBT Vlé-Halle] d · ,éQ§> li l LE Q 4Aéo a
trout! tr es. ie
{ g S3 i Mgt 182805 $5},; f
J James Mcliirmon, fa., gf, [,$,g,;=~ ,
` QQ; M {
t P1arnriff—Appel1ant, _ ...-. `Z
. v, O4-0281-pri CO j
1. ‘ T3 -»ie
Thomas Hunt, John Ltthda, =. _ w ‘ "
‘i; -./t A --—
Defendants-Appellees. W
Appellant, pm se, moves for appointment of counsel and informa pmrperrs status. Upon due
consideration. it is ORDERED that the motion for rrr forma prruperts status is dented as
unnecessary became the district Cottrt granted and did not thereafter revoke informa pmrperrs ‘
status. The motion for appointment of counsel is denied and the appeal is dismissed because th
appellanfs challenge to the district CDl.·|1`l'S]UdgH,1€Bt; dismissing without prejudice te exhausri n
of administrative remedies, lacks an argttablc basis in law or fact. See Neitzke v. Williams, 49 -
U.S. 319, 325 (1989); 28 U.S.C. § 19150:). The appellant remains free to renew his claim in t
district court after completion of exhaustion of prison administrative remedies.
FOR THE COURT:
` Roseann B. acliechnie, Cl rlc C
MAH `1 8 2005j B 2,44/
att'tll;‘i2 J { 4S'` l
p ae$:ti@ piper
UMA SAOJS I m l `*_w"~`wM_"
I_ I
is SUED AS MANDATE. mpg 1 5 20 _ {