Case Name: Clarence B. JACKSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Daniel J. STACK, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-11-17
Citations: 451 F. App'x 569
Docket Number: No. 11-2746
Parties: Clarence B. JACKSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Daniel J. STACK, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before JOHN L. COFFEY, Circuit Judge, JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge and KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 451
Pages: 569–570

Head Matter:
Clarence B. JACKSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Daniel J. STACK, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 11-2746.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 16, 2011.
Decided Nov. 17, 2011.
Clarence B. Jackson, Decatur, IL, pro se.
Before JOHN L. COFFEY, Circuit Judge, JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge and KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge.
After examining the briefs and record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and record. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2)(C).

Opinion:
ORDER
Clarence Jackson filed in the district court what he titled as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Named as the respondent is an Illinois circuit judge. Jackson contends that unnamed employees of the State of Illinois are at fault for years of discrimination on the basis of race and sex that has limited his opportunities for employment and income. The district court dismissed the action because Jackson is not in custody and so the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to grant habeas-corpus relief. We agree that the district court lacked jurisdiction because Jackson is not in custody, see Bailey v. Hill, 599 F.3d 976, 978-79 (9th Cir.2010); Kholyavskiy v. Achim, 443 F.3d 946, 948-49 (7th Cir.2006); Robledo-Gonzales v. Ashcroft, 342 F.3d 667, 674 (7th Cir.2003), and thus dismissal was proper.
AFFIRMED.