Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 17, 2024

Altenburger v. Federal Bureau of Prison

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:24-cv-02966
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Altenburger v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, Judge Carter ordered a filing fee or fee-waiver application before the case could proceed.

Who this affects

Bruce Altenburger, an incarcerated plaintiff whose severed claims were opened as this separate action; the case cannot proceed unless he satisfies the court’s payment or fee-application requirements.

What happened

Bruce Altenburger, who is incarcerated, brought claims with other incarcerated people. The court separated each person’s claims into a separate case and opened Altenburger’s claims under this docket number.

The court said that, if the case proceeds as a petition challenging custody under federal law, Altenburger must either pay a $5 filing fee or submit a signed application to proceed without paying the fee in advance within 30 days. If he instead wants to proceed as a civil action, he must submit an application and a prisoner authorization form or prepay $405 in fees.

The order does not decide the underlying claims. Judge Carter directed Altenburger to meet one of these payment or application requirements, stated that no response or summons was required yet, and said the action would be dismissed without prejudice if Altenburger failed to comply or otherwise respond.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Altenburger v. Federal Bureau of Prison · No. 1:24-cv-02966
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
June 17, 2024

Background

Bruce Altenburger, who the opinion says is incarcerated at USP Allenwood in Pennsylvania, brought an action together with other incarcerated individuals. The court explains that the individuals’ claims were separated and opened as separate actions. Altenburger’s severed claims were opened under docket number 24-CV-2966 and assigned to Judge Carter’s docket as related to an earlier proceeding involving the same type of requested relief.

In that earlier related proceeding, the court recharacterized a complaint seeking injunctive relief from the Federal Bureau of Prisons as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. A habeas petition under that statute challenges the legality or duration of a person’s custody. The court stated that it would require the $5 filing fee if Altenburger’s action likewise proceeds under Section 2241.

Order

The court ordered Altenburger, within 30 days of the order, either to pay the $5 filing fee or submit a signed application to proceed without prepaying fees and costs. The application was to identify docket number 24-CV-2966 (ALC). The court stated that no answer was required at that time and that no summons would issue.

The order also gave Altenburger an alternative if he did not wish to pursue relief under Section 2241 and instead wanted to proceed with a civil action. He would then have to submit an application to proceed without prepaying fees along with a prisoner authorization form allowing installment payments of $350 from his prison account, or prepay $405 in total fees: a $350 filing fee and a $55 administrative fee.

Disposition and effect

Judge Carter did not rule on the merits of Altenburger’s underlying claims. The order directs payment of the applicable fee or submission of the required application. It states that, if Altenburger fails to comply within the permitted time or otherwise respond, the action will be dismissed without prejudice. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.