United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Statesboro Division
STAN BAKER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
who is currently housed at Georgia State Prison in
Reidsville, Georgia, filed a cause of action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983 to contest certain conditions of his
confinement. (Doc. 1.) Concurrently, Plaintiff also filed a
Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. (Doc.
2.) For the reasons which follow, the Court
DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to
Proceed in Forma Pauperis. For these same reasons, I
RECOMMEND that the Court DISMISS
without prejudice Plaintiff's Complaint,
DIRECT the Clerk of Court to
CLOSE this case and enter the appropriate
judgment of dismissal, and DENY Plaintiff
leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.
Complaint, Plaintiff asserts he has been in the infirmary at
Georgia State Prison since April 2017, and both the infirmary
and the prison are not compliant with the Americans with
Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12132, et seq.
Plaintiff also asserts there are no call buttons in the
infirmary, nor are nurses available to bath, change, or move
paralyzed prisoners. (Doc. 1, p. 5.) Plaintiff seeks a
transfer to Augusta State Medical Prison and monetary
damages. (Id. at p. 6.)
seeks to bring this action in forma pauperis under
42 U.S.C. § 1983. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), the
Court may authorize the filing of a civil lawsuit without the
prepayment of fees if the plaintiff submits an affidavit that
includes a statement of all of his assets and shows an
inability to pay the filing fee and also includes a statement
of the nature of the action which shows that he is entitled
to redress. Even if the plaintiff proves indigence, the Court
must dismiss the action if it is frivolous or malicious, or
fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 28
U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(ii). Additionally,
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the Court must review a
complaint in which a prisoner seeks redress from a
governmental entity. Upon such screening, the Court must
dismiss a complaint, or any portion thereof, that is
frivolous or malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted or which seeks monetary relief from a
defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §
reviewing a complaint on an application to proceed in
forma pauperis, the Court is guided by the instructions
for pleading contained in the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 8 (“A pleading
that states a claim for relief must contain [among other
things] . . . a short and plain statement of the claim
showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.”);
Fed.R.Civ.P. 10 (requiring that claims be set forth in
numbered paragraphs, each limited to a single set of
circumstances). Further, a claim is frivolous under Section
1915(e)(2)(B)(i) “if it is ‘without arguable
merit either in law or fact.'” Napier v.
Preslicka, 314 F.3d 528, 531 (11th Cir. 2002) (quoting
Bilal v. Driver, 251 F.3d 1346, 1349 (11th Cir.
a complaint fails to state a claim under Section
1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) is governed by the same standard applicable
to motions to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
12(b)(6). Thompson v. Rundle, 393 F. App'x 675,
678 (11th Cir. 2010). Under that standard, this Court must
determine whether the complaint contains “sufficient
factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to
relief that is plausible on its face.'”
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570
(2007)). A plaintiff must assert “more than labels and
conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a
cause of action will not” suffice. Twombly,
550 U.S. at 555. Section 1915 also “accords judges not
only the authority to dismiss a claim based on an
indisputably meritless legal theory, but also the unusual
power to pierce the veil of the complaint's factual
allegations and dismiss those claims whose factual
contentions are clearly baseless.” Bilal, 251
F.3d at 1349 (quoting Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S.
319, 327 (1989)).
analysis, the Court will abide by the long-standing principle
that the pleadings of unrepresented parties are held to a
less stringent standard than those drafted by attorneys and,
therefore, must be liberally construed. Haines v.
Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972); Boxer X v.
Harris, 437 F.3d 1107, 1110 (11th Cir. 2006)
(“Pro se pleadings are held to a less
stringent standard than pleadings drafted by attorneys . . .
.”) (quoting Hughes v. Lott, 350 F.3d 1157,
1160 (11th Cir. 2003)). However, Plaintiff's
unrepresented status will not excuse mistakes regarding
procedural rules. McNeil v. United States, 508 U.S.
106, 113 (1993) (“We have never suggested that
procedural rules in ordinary civil litigation should be
interpreted so as to excuse mistakes by those who proceed
Dismissal for Abuse of Judicial Process
Complaint form directly asks Plaintiff whether he has
“brought any lawsuits in federal court”
“[w]hile incarcerated or detained in any
facility” prior to his current filing. (Doc. 1, p.
2.) This form directs a litigant to “describe [any]
additional lawsuits on another piece of paper, ” if he
has filed “more than one lawsuit[.]”
(Id.) Plaintiff disclosed a case that is currently
pending in the Northern District of Georgia. (Id.)
However, a search of Plaintiff's litigation history
reveals that he has filed at least one other cause of action
prior to executing his Complaint on March 6, 2018: Compl.,
Webb v. Brown, 1:15-cv-032 (S.D. Ga. Feb. 27, 2015),
ECF No. 1.
the Complaint form asks whether Plaintiff had “any suit
dismissed on the ground that it was frivolous, malicious, or
failed to state a claim” in which he was permitted to
proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 1, p. 3.) Plaintiff
checked the blank for “No” as his response to
this question. However, the same cause of action identified
in the preceding paragraph should have elicited an
affirmative response to this question, which Plaintiff failed
to provide. Order, Webb v. Brown, 1:15-cv-032 (S.D.
Ga. Feb. 27, 2015), ECF No. 3 (granting in forma
pauperis status); R. & R. and Order, Webb v.
Brown, 1:15-cv-032 (S.D. Ga. Apr. 15 and May 11, 2015),
ECF Nos. 7, 9 (dismissing cause of action for failure to
state a claim).
previously stated, Section 1915 requires a court to dismiss a
prisoner's action if, at any time, the court determines
that it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim, or
seeks relief from an immune defendant. 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B). Significantly, “[a] finding that the
plaintiff engaged in bad faith litigiousness or manipulative
tactics warrants dismissal” under Section 1915.
Redmon v. Lake Cty. Sheriff's Office, 414 F.
App'x 221, 225 (11th Cir. 2011) (alteration in original)
(quoting Attwood v. Singletary, 105 F.3d 610, 613
(11th Cir. 1997)). In addition, Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 11(c) permits a court to impose sanctions,
including dismissal, for “knowingly fil[ing] a pleading
that contains false contentions.” Id. at