United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Lake Charles Division
KATHLEEN KAY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
the court is a civil rights complaint filed pursuant to
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 91 S.Ct. 1999
(1971), by pro se plaintiff Ronny Lee Waldrip, who is not
proceeding in forma pauperis in this matter. Waldrip is an
inmate in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons
(“BOP”) and is currently incarcerated at the
Federal Correctional Institute at Oakdale, Louisiana
(“FCIO”). Doc. 4.
states that Calvin Johnson, warden of FCIO, has denied his
request for Trulincsaccess. Doc. 4, p. 3. He maintains that
“numerous like-situated inmates” have been
granted such access. Id. He now brings suit in this
court, seeking injunctive relief, compensatory damages, and
reimbursement for the filing fee in this case. Id.
Law & Analysis
claims are subject to screening under the Prison Litigation
Reform Act. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Under that law, a
district court is required to review any civil complaint in
which a prisoner seeks relief against a government entity,
officer, or employee, regardless of whether he has paid the
filing fee, and to dismiss same under § 1915A(b)(1) if
the complaint is frivolous. Thompson v. Hayes, 542
Fed. App'x 420, 420-21 (5th Cir. 2013). 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). When determining whether a complaint is frivolous, the
court must accept plaintiff's allegations as true.
Horton v. Cockrell, 70 F.3d 397, 400 (5th Cir.
Bivens/42 U.S.C. § 1983
law provides a cause of action against any person who, under
the color of state law, acts to deprive another of any right,
privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution and laws
of the United States. 42 U.S.C. § 1983. A
Bivens action is the counterpart for those acting
under color of federal law of a suit brought under §
1983. E.g., Abate v. Southern Pacific Transp.
Co., 993 F.2d 107, 110 n. 14 (5th Cir. 1993); see
also Dean v. Gladney, 621 F.2d 1331, 1336 (5th Cir.
1980) (“The effect of Bivens was, in essence, to create
a remedy for federal officers, acting under color of federal
law, that was analogous to the section 1983 action against
state officials.”) In order to hold the defendant
liable, a plaintiff must allege facts to show (1) that a
constitutional right has been violated and (2) that the
conduct complained of was committed by a person acting under
color of federal law; that is, that the defendant was a
government actor. See West v. Atkins, 108 S.Ct.
2250, 2254-55 (1988).
Rule 8 Considerations
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires a pleading
to contain “a short and plain statement of the claim
showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). Under Rule 8, the complaint must allege
“sufficient facts from which the court can determine
the existence of subject matter jurisdiction and from which
the defendants can fairly appreciate the claim made against
them.” Bynum v. Terrebonne Parish Consol.
Gov't, 2011 WL 6654985, at *3 (E.D. La. Nov. 8,
2011) (citations omitted).