Benson v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
JERRY BENSON,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No. 14-cv-01458 (CRC)
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Jerry Benson has brought this action against the Federal Bureau of Prisons
(“BOP”), alleging that he “was lock[ed] up 20 Days past [his] Release Date” and demanding
damages of $30,000. Compl. On October 9, 2014, BOP filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that
Benson’s claim for damages against a federal agency must be brought under the Federal Tort
Claims Act (“FTCA”) and that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the claim because
Benson failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before filing his complaint. Mem. of P. & A.
in Support of Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss at 4–6. In the alternative, BOP argued that Benson’s one-
sentence complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Id. at 6.
On November 17, 2014, the Court issued an Order advising Benson of his obligations under
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the local rules of this Court to respond to the motion.
Specifically, the Court warned Benson that if he failed to file an opposition to the motion by
December 15, 2014, the motion would be treated as conceded. To date, Benson has neither filed an
opposition to the motion nor requested an extension of time. Mail sent to the address provided by
Benson at the time he filed his complaint has not been returned by the United States Postal Service
as undeliverable, and Benson has not advised the Court of a change of address.
The Court, therefore, will grant BOP’s motion as conceded and dismiss this case. See, e.g.,
Poblete v. Goldberg, 680 F. Supp. 2d 18, 19 (D.D.C. 2009) (“A district court may grant a motion to
dismiss as conceded based on the absence of a response.”) (citing Fox v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 389
F.3d 1291, 1295 (D.C. Cir. 2004)); Bell v. Library of Congress, 539 F. Supp. 2d 411, 413 (D.D.C.
2008) (concluding that FTCA bars claimant from bringing suit until after she has exhausted
administrative remedies, and, alternatively, noting that dismissal was warranted where “the non-
moving party fails to file a memorandum of points and authorities in opposition within a prescribed
time period”). An Order will be issued separately.
/s/
CHRISTOPHER R. COOPER
United States District Judge
Date: December 24, 2014
2