Felix-Rodriguez v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
Filing
4
OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiff's complaint 2 is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim. Signed on 8/8/17 by Judge Ann L. Aiken. (Mailed copy to plaintiff) (dsg)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF OREGON
JORGE FELIX-RODRIGUEZ,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 3:17-cv-01116-AA
OPINION AND ORDER
v.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS,
Defendant.
AIKEN, District Judge:
Plaintiff, an inmate at the Federal Correctional Institution (FCI) in Terminal Island, files
this federal tort action and moves to proceed in forma pauperis.
Pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act, a prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis is
required to pay the full filing fee of$350.00 when funds exist. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(l). Plaintiff
has been without sufficient funds for the six months immediately preceding the filing of his
complaint and the court will not assess a partial filing fee. However, plaintiffs complaint is
deficient and must be dismissed.
1-
OPINION AND ORDER
In federal court, dismissal of a pro se complaint for failure to state a claim "is proper only
if it is clear that the plaintiff cam1ot prove any set of facts in support of the claim that would
entitle him to relief." Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012). The court must
construe prose pleadings liberally and afford the plaintiff"the benefit of any doubt." Hebbe v.
Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010). "Unless it is absolutely clear that no amendment can
cure" defects in the complaint, "a prose litigant is entitled to notice of the complaint's
deficiencies and an opportunity to amend prior to dismissal of the action." Lucas v. Dep 't of
Corr., 66 F.3d 245, 248 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam).
Plaintiff alleges that correctional officers at FCI Sheridan lost his personal property when
he was transferred from to another federal facility. Plaintiff filed an administrative claim for
damages with the Bureau of Prisons, and he was offered inadequate compensation. Comp!. at 3-4
& Exhibits (ECF No. 2). Plaintiff now asserts a claim for negligence and seeks compensation for
his lost property.
Construing plaintiffs claim liberally, he alleges a claim for negligence under the Federal
Tort Claims Act (FTCA). However, the FTCA bars plaintiffs claim under the exception for the
detention of goods by a law enforcement officer. See 28 U.S.C. § 2680(c); Ali v. Fed. Bureau of
Prisons, 552 U.S. 214 (2008). In Ali, the Supreme Court held that this exception barred an FTCA
claim arising from property allegedly lost when a prisoner was transferred between federal
correctional facilities. Ali, 552 U.S. at 216-17, 228; see also Bramwell v. U.S. Bureau ofPrisons,
348 F.3d 804, 807-08 (9th Cir. 2003) (holding that "BOP officers are 'law enforcement officers'
exempt from FTCA liability for damage to detained goods" in a suit alleging negligent damage
to a prisoner's eyeglasses).
2-
OPINION AND ORDER
For these reasons, plaintiffs complaint fails to state a claim. Moreover, amendment
would not cure the deficiency, as plaintiff cannot sustain a tort action against the Bureau of
Prisons based on the alleged mishandling of his property.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons set fo1ih above, plaintiffs complaint (ECF No. 2) is DISMISSED for
failure to state a claim.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED
this~August, 2017.
AnnAiken
United States District Judge
3-
OPINION AND ORDER
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?