Norman Z. Flick v. Julie W. Alba and Peter M. Carlson
Norman Z. FLICK, Appellant, v. Julie W. ALBA and Peter M. Carlson, Appellees
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
Norman Z. Flick, an inmate at the Federal Medical Center (FMC) in Rochester, Minnesota, appeals the district court’s 1
order granting defendant prison officials’ motion for summary judgment. We affirm.
Flick filed his Bivens-type complaint against the case manager coordinator and the warden of FMC seeking injunctive relief and damages for their denial of his right of access to the prison’s administrative remedy procedure. We conclude that the federal regulations providing for an administrative remedy procedure do not in and of themselves create a liberty interest in access to that procedure. When the claim underlying the administrative grievance involves a constitutional right, the prisoner’s right to petition the government for redress is the right of access to the courts, which is not compromised by the prison’s refusal to entertain his grievance.
See Azeez v. DeRobertis, 568 F.Supp. 8, 10 (N.D.Ill.1982) (although state prison grievance procedures “may be evidence of a parent substantive right, they do not in themselves trigger a protected liberty interest”).
2
Accordingly, we affirm.
1
. The Honorable Harry H. MacLaughlin, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.
2
. We note that, in any event, in this case denial of Flick’s administrative complaint was in accordance with established procedure.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 25 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(stating that the federal grievance regulations providing for an administrative remedy procedure do not a create liberty interest in access to that procedure.”)
-
(noting that, although prisoners have federal constitutional rights to 17 petition the government for redress of grievances and access to the courts, those rights are 18 “not compromised by the prison’s refusal to entertain his grievance”)
-
(federal regulations providing administrative remedy in Bureau of prisons do not create a liberty interest)
-
(although there certainly is a First Amendment right to petition government for redress of grievances, there is no right to a response or any particular 4 See Owens v. Hinsley, 635 F.3d 950, 953 (7th Cir. 2011)
Cited by 348 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.