United States District Court, D. Rhode Island
JUAN C. RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff,
INVESTIGATOR CABRAL, et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
WILLIAM E. SMITH, Chief District Judge.
the Court is a civil rights Complaint (ECF No. 1) filed by
Plaintiff Juan C. Rodriguez, pro se, an inmate at the Adult
Correctional Institutions ("ACI"), Cranston, Rhode
Island, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Rodriguez has also
filed an Application to Proceed without Prepayment of Fees
and Affidavit (ECF No. 2) ("Application").
Court is required to screen the Complaint pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A. Having done so, the Court
finds, on initial review, that the Complaint states a claim
on which relief may be granted.
connection with proceedings in forma pauperis, § 1915(e)(2)
instructs the Court to dismiss a case at any time if the
Court determines that the action: "(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." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
Similarly, § 1915A directs courts to screen complaints filed
by prisoners against a governmental entity, officer, or
employee of such entity and dismiss the complaint, or any
portion thereof, for reasons identical to those set forth in
§ 1915(e)(2)(B). 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
legal standard for dismissing a complaint for failure to
state a claim pursuant to § 1915(e)(2) and § 1915A is
identical to the standard used when ruling on a Rule 12(b)(6)
motion." Chase v. Chafee, No. CA 11-586 ML,
2011 WL 6826504, at *2 (D.R.I. Dec. 9, 2011) (citing
Pelumi v. Landry, No. 08-107, 2008 WL 2660968, at *2
(D.R.I. June 30, 2008)). The Court must review pleadings of a
pro se plaintiff liberally, accepting his well-pled
allegations as true, and construing them in the light most
favorable to him. Id., (citing Ashcroft v.
Iqbal, 566 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Estelle v.
Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976)). However, "the
Court need not credit bald assertions, unverifiable
conclusions or irrational factual allegations."
Id . (citing Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678). To state a
claim on which relief may be granted, the complaint must
"contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to
state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face.'" Id . (quoting Iqbal, 566
U.S. at 678).
alleges that a number of ACI officers and officials have
violated his rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth
Amendments, and a permanent federal injunction. (Compl. ¶¶
47-50.) He names as Defendants Investigator Cabral,
Lieutenant Burt, Deputy Warden Aceto, Lieutenant Amaral,
Warden Matthew Kettle, and Director of the R.I. Department of
Corrections Ashbel T. Wall II. (Id. ¶¶ 4-9.) All are sued in
their individual and official capacities. (Id.) Rodriguez
seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, compensatory and
punitive damages, and costs. (Id. ¶¶ 53-60.)
brief, Rodriguez alleges that: false charges were filed
against him for retaliatory reasons; guilty findings were not
supported by evidence; alleged evidence against him was not
disclosed; disciplinary hearings were not held before an
impartial fact-finder; and guilty findings and sanctions
imposed were upheld, all in violation of his Fourteenth
Amendment right to due process. (Compl. ¶ 47.) Rodriguez
further alleges that the excessive confinement (169 days) in
segregation imposed, as well as the corresponding loss of
privileges, constituted cruel and unusual punishment in
violation of the Eighth Amendment and also violated a
permanent federal injunction. (Id. ¶¶ 48-49.) Finally, he
claims that Defendants acted with deliberate indifference,
again in violation of the Eighth Amendment, by acting
negligently and maliciously "in the filing, for
retaliatory purposes, finding of guilt, and upholding of
false charges." (Id. ¶ 50.)
Complaint contains sufficient detail in support of
Rodriguez's allegations, (id. ¶¶ 11-45), accepted as
true, to "state a claim to relief that is plausible on
its face." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting Bell Atl.,
550 U.S. at 570). The Court therefore concludes that the
Complaint survives initial scrutiny under §§ 1915(e)(2) and
noted above, Rodriguez has also filed an Application to
proceed in forma pauperis. He filed the affidavit required by
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1); however, Rodriguez has not submitted
a copy of his inmate account statement, certified by an
appropriate official at the ACI, as directed by §
1915(a)(2). Accordingly, Rodriguez is ordered to
file a certified copy of his ...