Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-02504/USCOURTS-ca8-05-02504-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 540
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Mandamus and Other
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-2504

___________

Andre K. Randall, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Whitney I. LeBlanc, Warden, FMC *

Rochester; Jack Fox, Executive * [UNPUBLISHED]

Assistant, FMC Rochester; Jane Doe, *

(“Warden’s Secretary”), Secretary FMC *

Rochester; John Doe, (“Mr. Alcoser”), *

Chaplin, FMC Rochester; John Doe, *

(“The Captain”), Captain, FMC *

Rochester; John Doe, (“Mr. Parr”), *

Lieutenant, FMC Rochester; Stu *

Solmonson, Case Manager, FMC *

Rochester; Randy Preston, Staff, FMC *

Rochester; Daryl Kosiak, North Central *

Regional Counsel, Bureau of Prisons; *

and their successors, officers, servants, *

attorneys, agents, employers and those *

persons in active concert or *

participation with them, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: November 1, 2005 

Filed: November 4, 2005

___________

Appellate Case: 05-2504 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/04/2005 Entry ID: 1971435
1

The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Arthur J.

Boylan, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

-2-

Before BYE, McMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Federal inmate Andre Randall (Randall) appeals the district court’s1

 dismissal

of his petition for a writ of mandamus. Randall’s request for punitive damages fails

because the defendant federal prison officials–all of whom were sued in their official

capacities–are immune from liability for monetary damages in this case. See

Hagemeier v. Block, 806 F.2d 197, 202-03 (8th Cir. 1986) (sovereign immunity bars

claims against federal officials in their official capacities unless immunity is waived).

As for Randall’s request for injunctive relief, we affirm the dismissal on

mootness grounds because Randall has been released from federal custody. See 8th

Cir. R. 47A(a). We also deny his motion for appointment of counsel.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-2504 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/04/2005 Entry ID: 1971435