United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern District
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
G. FLEISSIG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
matter is before the Court upon the motion of plaintiff
Dwayne Robison, an inmate currently housed at Eastern
Reception Diagnostic and Correctional Center
(“ERDCC”), for leave to commence this action
without prepayment of the filing fee. Having reviewed
plaintiff's financial information, the Court will assess
an initial partial filing fee of $4.00. In addition, for the
reasons discussed below, the Court will dismiss the complaint
Fee Pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), a prisoner bringing a civil
action in forma pauperis is required to pay the full amount
of the filing fee. If the prisoner has insufficient funds in
his prison account to pay the entire fee, the Court must
assess and, when funds exist, collect an initial partial
filing fee of 20 percent of the greater of (1) the average
monthly deposits in the prisoner's account or (2) the
average monthly balance in the prisoner's account for the
prior six-month period. After payment of the initial partial
filing fee, the prisoner is required to make monthly payments
of 20 percent of the preceding month's income credited to
the prisoner's account. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The
agency having custody of the prisoner will forward these
monthly payments to the Clerk of Court each time the amount
in the prisoner's account exceeds $10.00, until the
filing fee is fully paid. Id.
has submitted a declaration and a certified copy of his
prison account statement for the five-month period preceding
the submission of his complaint. A review of plaintiff's
account indicates an average monthly deposit of $20.00, and
an average monthly balance of $0. Plaintiff has insufficient
funds to pay the entire filing fee. Accordingly, the Court
will assess an initial partial filing fee of $4.00, which is
twenty percent of his average monthly deposit.
Standard on Initial Review
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), 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 may be
granted. An action is frivolous if it “lacks an
arguable basis in either law or fact.” Neitzke v.
Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989). An action fails to
state a claim upon which relief may 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 (2007).
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.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678
(2009). The claim must “raise a right to relief above
the speculative level.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at
555. Where the well-pleaded facts do not permit the inference
of more than the “mere possibility of misconduct,
” the complaint has alleged, but has not shown, that
the pleader is entitled to relief. Iqbal, 556 U.S.
at 679 (citing Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2)); see also
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557 (if the well-pleaded facts are
merely consistent with wrongdoing, the complaint stops short
of the line between possibility and plausibility).
Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for
relief is a context-specific task that requires the reviewing
court to draw upon judicial experience and common sense.
Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679.
is currently an inmate at ERDCC, but his allegations concern
his mail not being forwarded from Farmington Correctional
Center (“FCC”). This case is one of eleven civil
actions plaintiff has filed in this Court pro se and in forma
pauperis since May 2, 2019. He brings this action pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Jeff Norman (Deputy Division
Director, Missouri Department of Corrections
(“MoDOC”)), Sara Rogers (Mail Room Supervisor,
FCC), Terri Lawson (Warden, FCC), and Anne Precythe
complaint is difficult to follow, but his allegations concern
his not receiving mail at ERDCC. He alleges that he was
transferred from FCC to ERDCC on May 21, 2019, but that he
did not receive any mail from May 1 to May 17, 2019. He
alleges that defendant Terri Lawson “allow[ed] the mail
room to resend [it] back.” “I sent out 6-8 letter
request[ing] catalogs on or around the end of the 4-29-19 up
to 5-17-19 I am [illegible] to receive catalog oldies.com on
regular and oriental trading[.]”
alleges that Sara Rogers, the supervisor of the mailroom at
FCC, has not transferred any of his subscriptions to ERDCC.
“Mrs. Roger[s] refuse to transfer my mail she is return
my mail is take appox. 2-4 week for Yaheweh Religious
material to come in I sent on 4-30-19.” He states that
he is to receive “oldies.com” every two to four
weeks, but only four catalogs have arrived at ERDCC.
is denied the fact that they keep return my mail. You have
exact[ly] 30 day to receive [forwarded] mail from another
camp once you transfer then is up to the offender to change
address per policy. Mrs. Rogers is know[n] to hold mail and
return mail the FCC staff has told me.” “I
recent[ly] transfer and I am still not receiv[ing] my mail I
sent a 9-10 letter within 30 day prior to me being transfer
and the mail room is denied the fact that they are holding my
mail.” Plaintiff states that he never received
information on “Social Security federal court attorney
name” that he requested. Nor has he received a response
to a letter he wrote to a friend.
attaches to his complaint a list of “mail not
received.” The list includes ten items of mail he did
not receive in May 2019, likely because of his transfer on
May 21, 2019. For June, plaintiff lists two catalogs he did
not receive; for July and August, he does not list any
specific items ...