United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
OPINION AND ORDER PARTIALLY DISMISSING COMPLAINT (ECF
NO. 1)
Paul
D. Borman United States District Judge.
I.
INTRODUCTION
This
case is on remand from the United States Court of Appeals for
the Sixth Circuit. Before the Court is Plaintiff Anthony
Meeks' pro se civil rights complaint filed
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is a state
prisoner incarcerated at the Cotton Correctional Facility in
Jackson, Michigan. The Court has reviewed the complaint and
now DISMISSES IT IN PART.
II.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Plaintiff
was allowed to proceed without prepayment of fees. See 28
§ U.S.C. 1915(a); McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114
F.3d 601, 604 (6th Cir. 1997). However, 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B) states:
Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that
may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any
time if the court determines that:
(B) the action or appeal:
(i) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted;
or
(iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune
from such relief.
A
complaint is frivolous if it lacks an arguable basis in law
or fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325
(1989); see also Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25,
32 (1992). Sua sponte dismissal is appropriate if
the complaint lacks an arguable basis when filed.
McGore, 114 F.3d at 612.
While a
complaint “does not need detailed factual allegations,
” the “[f]actual allegations must be enough to
raise a right to relief above the speculative level on the
assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true
(even if doubtful in fact).” Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (footnote and
citations omitted). Stated differently, “a complaint
must contain 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 Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570).
“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. (citing
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556).
To
prove a prima facie case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a civil
rights plaintiff must establish that: (1) the defendant acted
under color of state law; and (2) the offending conduct
deprived the plaintiff of rights secured by federal law.
Bloch v. Ribar, 156 F.3d 673, 677 (6th Cir. 1998)
(citing Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 535
(1981)). “If a plaintiff fails to make a showing on any
essential element of a § 1983 claim, it must
fail.” Redding v. St. Eward, 241 F.3d 530, 532
(6th Cir. 2001).
III.
...