Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-03183/USCOURTS-ca10-90-03183-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
E. H. Anderson
Appellee
Paul Fazzini
Appellant
Gary L. Henman
Appellee
Rick Simpson
Appellee

Document Text:

FILED 

Uoited States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

SEP 6 1990 

ltOBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

PAUL FAZZINI, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

GARY L. HENMAN; E. H. ANDERSON; RICK 

SIMPSON, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) No. 90-3183 

) (D.C. No. 90-3151-R) 

) ( D. Kan.) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT * 

Before ANDERSON, BALDOCK, and EBEL, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App . P . 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. 

submitted without oral argument. 

The case is therefore ordered 

Appellant is permitted to proceed on appeal without payment 

of fees or costs. 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law o f 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 90-3183 Document: 010110041913 Date Filed: 09/06/1990 Page: 1 
This matter is before us for consideration of appellant's 

petition for a temporary restraining order against the enforcement 

of a Bureau of Prisons policy, which, as best we can determine, 

allows the deduction from appellant's monthly paycheck an amount 

of money to be applied toward the payment of the special 

assessment authorized by 18 U.S.C. § 3013. Appellant claims the 

money was deducted without prior notice or a hearing. At the time 

this appeal was taken, the policy had not been enforced against 

him. 

The petition is denied. However, the denial is without 

prejudice to a proper application for relief brought in the 

district court. 

Additionally, we have reviewed the record and briefs filed in 

connection with this appeal and are persuaded the district court's 

judgment is correct. The action was dismissed without prejudice 

for failure to establish exhaustion of administrative remedies. 

See Brice v. Day, 604 F.2d 664 (10th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 

U.S. 1086 (1980). Once he has done so, appellant may refile his 

complaint in federal district court. 

Accordingly, the judgment of the United States District Court 

for the District of Kansas is AFFIRMED. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

PER CURIAM 

2 

Appellate Case: 90-3183 Document: 010110041913 Date Filed: 09/06/1990 Page: 2