United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
L. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
a prisoner, seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this
civil action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of
the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).
Having reviewed plaintiffs financial information, the Court
assesses a partial initial filing fee of $23.00, which is
twenty percent of his average monthly deposit. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). Additionally, the Court will
require plaintiff to submit an amended complaint.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court is required to dismiss a
complaint filed in forma pauperis if it is frivolous,
malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted. To state a claim for relief, a complaint must plead
more than "legal conclusions" and
"[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of
action [that are] supported by mere conclusory
statements." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,
678 (2009). A plaintiff must demonstrate a plausible claim
for relief, which is more than a "mere possibility of
misconduct." Id. at 679. "A claim has
facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content
that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that
the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged."
Id. at 678. Determining whether a complaint states a
plausible claim for relief is a context-specific task that
requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial
experience and common sense. Id. at 679.
reviewing a complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the
Court accepts the well-pled facts as true. Furthermore, the
Court liberally construes the allegations.
brings this action against Drew Poland, a Deputy U.S.
Marshal, and several John Doe Deputy U.S. Marshals. Plaintiff
alleges that on December 11, 2016, Poland and his team
entered his house for the purpose of arresting him. He says
that when they entered his bedroom he put his hands in the
air. Despite his compliance, two of the unnamed Deputies shot
him with Taser guns. They continued to stun him for about
forty seconds and then handcuffed him. He says he suffered
permanent injuries as a result.
under § 1983 requires a causal link to, and direct
responsibility for, the alleged deprivation of rights."
Madewell v. Roberts, 909 F.2d 1203, 1208 (8th Cir.
1990); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 676
(2009) ("Because vicarious liability is inapplicable to
Bivens and § 1983 suits, a plaintiff must plead
that each Government-official defendant, through the
official's own individual actions, has violated the
Constitution."). In the instant action, plaintiff has
not set forth any facts indicating that Poland was directly
involved in or personally responsible for the alleged
violations of his constitutional rights. As a result, the
complaint does not state a plausible claim against Poland.
complaint does not state whether defendants are being sued in
their official or individual capacities. Where a
"complaint is silent about the capacity in which
[plaintiff] is suing defendant, [a district court must]
interpret the complaint as including only official-capacity
claims." Egerdahl v. Hibbing Community College,
72 F.3d 615, 619 (8th Cir. 1995); Nix v. Norman, 879
F.2d 429, 431 (8th Cir. 1989). Naming a government official
in his or her official capacity is the equivalent of naming
the government entity that employs the official, in this case
the United States. Will v. Michigan Dept of State
Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 (1989). The United States,
however, is immune from suit. E.g., United States v.
King, 395 U.S. 1, 4 (1969). As a result, the complaint
fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the Court will allow him to
file an amended complaint. Plaintiff is warned that the
filing of an amended complaint replaces the original
complaint, and so he must include each and every one of his
claims in the amended complaint. E.g., In re Wireless
Telephone Federal Cost Recovery Fees Litigation, 396
F.3d 922, 928 (8th Cir. 2005). Any claims from the original
complaint that are not included in the amended complaint will
be considered abandoned. Id. Plaintiff must allege
how each and every defendant is directly responsible for the
alleged harm. In order to sue defendants in their individual
capacities, plaintiff must specifically say so in the
complaint. If plaintiff fails to sue defendants in their
individual capacities, this action may be subject to
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to proceed in
forma pauperis [ECF No. 6] is GRANTED.
FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff must pay an initial filing
fee of $23.00 within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this
Order. Plaintiff is instructed to make his remittance payable
to "Clerk, United States District Court, " and to
include upon it: (1) his name; (2) his prison registration
number; (3) the case number; and (4) that the remittance is
for an original proceeding.
FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to send plaintiff