United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Lexington
CLIFTON B. DAVIDSON, Plaintiff,
BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
WILLIAM O. BERTELSMAN, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's motion for enforcement of a previous court order, Doc. 37. The Government has not filed a response. After reviewing Plaintiff's motion, the Court has determined that oral argument is unnecessary. For the following reasons, the Court denies the motion.
On March 19, 2013, this Court entered a Memorandum Opinion and Order denying Plaintiff's Rule 60(b)(6) motion for relief from the Court's prior entry of summary judgment in favor of the Bureau of Prisons ("BOP"). Doc. 30; see also Doc. 24. Despite the fact that the order denied Plaintiff relief under Rule 60, this Court did issue the following directive to the BOP: "Within 45 days, the BOP shall pay Davidson the sum of $350.00 and file a Notice in the record informing the Court that it has done so." Doc. 30, at 13.
In compliance with the Court's order, on May 2, 2013, Assistant United States Attorney ("AUSA") Andrew Sparks filed a Notice in the record that stated as follows: "Pursuant to the Court's Order of March 19, 2013 [Record No. 30] the undersigned has been advised that on May 2, 2013, the Bureau of Prisoners certified $350 for payment to the Plaintiff. This amount will be processed into the Plaintiff's inmate account." But Plaintiff claims that this $350 sum never made it to his inmate account. Doc. 37, at 2.
On May 20, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Notice with the Court alleging that the BOP had not complied with the Court's previous order because Plaintiff had not received the money owed him. Doc. 32. Plaintiff states that he then sent four (4) letters to the Financial Litigation Unit at the U.S. Attorney's Office in Springfield, IL, only two of which received responses. Doc. 37, at 3.
Attached to the motion is the Government's response to Plaintiff's letter of September 16, 2014. Doc. 37-5. In that letter, the Government informed Plaintiff that the U.S. Attorney's Office had used the $350 payment from BOP as an administrative offset towards the restitution that Plaintiff owes from a prior criminal conviction in federal court. Id.
After receiving the Government's response and then attempting to communicate directly with AUSA Sharp about this issue, Plaintiff filed the instant motion on March 27, 2015. Doc. 37, at 3.
Importantly, Plaintiff also attached to his motion a letter that he received from the Department of Justice ("DOJ") in January of 2011, entitled "U.S. Department of Justice Administrative Offset Notice." Doc. 37-2, at 1. In that letter, DOJ informed Plaintiff that it had the right "to reduce or withhold" any eligible payment to him for the purposes of satisfying the restitution that he owes as a result of his criminal conviction. Id. The letter further stated:
To avoid referral of your debt to the Treasury Offset Program, within 60 calendar days from the date of this notice you must: (1) pay your debt in full; (2) enter into a repayment agreement; or (3) present evidence that all or part of the criminal or the civil judgment debt is not past due or that the judgment debt has been stayed or satisfied.
If you fail to take any of the above steps within the 60 day time period, the Department of Justice will refer the debt to the Department of the Treasury and any and all payments due to you from the Federal government will be offset to pay the amount of your judgment debt.
Id. at 1-2.