United States District Court, D. Maine
FRANKLIN J. SALCEDO, Plaintiff
WILLIAM KING, et al., Defendants
RECOMMENDED DECISION AFTER SCREENING COMPLAINT
PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e), 1915a
C. Nivison U.S. Magistrate Judge
action, Plaintiff Franklin Salcedo, an inmate at the York
County Jail, alleges that he was injured during a prisoner
transport as the result of negligent conduct on the part of
York County sheriff deputies or corrections officers.
filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No.
3), which application the Court granted. (ECF No. 5.) In
accordance with the in forma pauperis statute, a preliminary
review of Plaintiff's complaint is appropriate. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2). Additionally, Plaintiff's complaint is
subject to screening “before docketing, if feasible or
… as soon as practicable after docketing, ”
because he is “a prisoner seek[ing] redress from a
governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental
entity.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).
a review of Plaintiff's complaint, I recommend the Court
dismiss Plaintiff's complaint without prejudice.
federal in forma pauperis statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915, is
designed to ensure meaningful access to the federal courts
for those persons unable to pay the costs of bringing an
action. When a party is proceeding in forma pauperis,
however, “the court shall dismiss the case at any time
if the court determines, ” inter alia, that the action
is “frivolous or malicious” or “fails to
state a claim on which relief may be granted” or
“seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is
immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B). “Dismissals [under § 1915] are
often made sua sponte prior to the issuance of process, so as
to spare prospective defendants the inconvenience and expense
of answering such complaints.” Neitzke v.
Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324 (1989).
addition to the review contemplated by § 1915,
Plaintiff's complaint is subject to screening under the
Prison Litigation Reform Act because Plaintiff currently is
incarcerated and seeks redress from governmental entities and
officers. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), (c). The
§ 1915A screening requires courts to “identify
cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of
the complaint, if the complaint (1) is frivolous, malicious,
or fails to state a claim.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b).
considering whether a complaint states a claim for which
relief may be granted, courts must assume the truth of all
well-plead facts and give the plaintiff the benefit of all
reasonable inferences therefrom. Ocasio-Hernandez v.
Fortuno-Burset, 640 F.3d 1, 12 (1st Cir. 2011). A
complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted if it does not plead “enough facts to state a
claim to relief that is plausible on its face.”
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570
a pro se plaintiff's complaint is subject to “less
stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers,
” Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972),
this is “not to say that pro se plaintiffs are not
required to plead basic facts sufficient to state a claim,
” Ferranti v. Moran, 618 F.2d 888, 890 (1st
Cir. 1980). To allege a civil action in federal court, it is
not enough for a plaintiff merely to allege that a defendant
acted unlawfully; a plaintiff must affirmatively allege facts
that identify the manner by which the defendant subjected the
plaintiff to a harm for which the law affords a remedy.
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).
to Plaintiff's filings, on January 26, 2018, York County
officers transported several prisoners, including Plaintiff,
in a van that did not contain enough seats for all of the
prisoners. The officers directed another prisoner to sit on
Plaintiff's lap. During the transport, the officer who
was driving the van applied the brakes during a turn and
Plaintiff, who was handcuffed and shackled, was injured.
(Complaint at 3, ECF No. 1; Additional Narrative, ECF No.
2-7.) Plaintiff alleges he suffered injuries to his neck and
back. (ECF No. 2-5, 2-6.) Following the incident, Plaintiff
received medical attention. (Grievance Exhibits, ECF Nos.
was subsequently transferred to the Cumberland County Jail.
Plaintiff alleges that when he asked as to the reason for the
transfer, a corrections officer replied: “You
immigrants are causing too many problems from filing
complaints.” (ECF No. 2-9.)
federal civil rights statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, permits
a plaintiff to file an action in federal court against any
person who has acted under color of state law to deprive the
plaintiff of a federal right. Estades-Negroni v. CPC
Hosp. San Juan Capestrano, 412 F.3d 1, 4 (1st Cir.
2005). The defendants identified in Plaintiff's complaint
qualify as state actors subject to suit under section 1983.
The issue is ...