United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Lake Charles Division
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
KATHLEEN KAY, Magistrate Judge.
Before the court is the pro se civil rights complaint filed in forma pauperis by plaintiff Randell Orange ("Orange"). Orange is an inmate in the custody of Louisiana's Department of Public Safety and Corrections (herein "LDOC") and is incarcerated at David Wade Correctional Center in Homer, Louisiana. He complains of events that occurred at Allen Correctional Center (herein "ACC") in Kinder, Louisiana.
Orange names the Geo Group, Inc., DOC Secretary James Leblanc; ACC Wardens Terry Terrell and Estes; ACC Captains Terry Laney, Greg Wise, and Garnett; ACC Sergeants Cook and Winndow; and ACC Lieutenants Layjay and Castallo as defendants.
This matter has been referred to the undersigned for review, report, and recommendation in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the standing orders of the court. For the following reasons it is recommended that this action be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
In his complaint, Orange alleges that defendants Castallo, Cook, Russell, Jay, and Winndow went into his cell and took his gold teeth crowns and six expensive magazines. Doc. 1, p. 5. Orange explained to the officers that he needed the crowns to prevent food particles from getting under the false teeth that are cemented on top of his real teeth. Id. Despite this information, Lt. Castallo took the crowns, stating that he was going to give them to Captain Wise who was the supervisor on duty. Id. However, Wise informed Orange that Lt. Castallo did not give the crowns to him. Doc. 1, p. 6. Orange states that an investigation revealed that Lt. Castallo took the gold crowns and sold them. Id. Following this incident, Lt. Castallo was laid off. Id.
As a result of not having his crowns, Orange claims that he had an infection, underwent an air suction procedure to remove food from between his real and false teeth, had four shots in his gums to relieve nerve pain, and been placed on antibiotics and other medication. Doc. 1, pp. 6, 7. He states that the defendants' actions violate his Eighth Amendment Constitutional Rights against cruel and unusual punishment. Doc. 1, p. 7. As relief, he seeks compensatory and punitive damages. Doc. 1, p. 4.
Law and Analysis
A. Frivolity Review
Orange has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Doc. 4. Under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B), a district court is directed to dismiss an action if the court determines that the action is frivolous or malicious or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. See, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii); Bradley v. Puckett, 157 F.3d 1022, 1025 (5th Cir.1998).
A complaint is frivolous if it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact. Gonzalez v. Wyatt, 157 F.3d 1016, 1019 (5th Cir.1998) (citing Siglar v. Hightower, 112 F.3d 191, 193 (5th Cir.1997)). A complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted if it is clear the plaintiff cannot prove any set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief. Doe v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 153 F.3d 211, 215 (5th Cir.1998). When determining whether a complaint is frivolous or fails to states a claim upon which relief may be granted, the court must accept ...