Plaintiff, who is currently incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institute located in Forrest City, Arkansas ("FCI-FC"), has filed a pro se*fn1 Complaint pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).*fn2 See docket entry #1. Plaintiff has also paid the $250 filing fee in full. See docket entry #2. For the reasons set forth herein, the Court will order service of the Complaint upon Defendants.
The Prison Litigation Reform Act requires federal courts to screen prisoner complaints seeking relief against a governmental entity, officer, or employee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or a portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that: (a) are legally frivolous or malicious; (b) fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (c) seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b).
In conducting its review, the Court is mindful that a complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a claim only if it appears beyond doubt that a plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of the claim or claims that would entitle him to relief. Springdale Educ. Ass'n v. Springdale Sch. Dist., 133 F.3d 649, 651 (8th Cir. 1998). The Court must accept the factual allegations in the complaint as true and hold a plaintiff's pro se complaint "to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers." Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972). However, such liberal pleading standards apply only to a plaintiff's factual allegations. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 330 n. 9 (1989). A plaintiff's complaint still must contain allegations sufficient to state a claim, as a matter of law, and must not set forth allegations that are merely conclusory. Martin v. Sargent, 780 F.2d 1334, 1337 (8th Cir. 1985).
In his Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants failed to provide him with adequate medical care for injuries to his left rotator cuff, a broken foot, and stomach problems caused by taking prescription pain medications. See docket entry #1. Construing Plaintiff's Complaint liberally, the Court concludes, for screening purposes only, that Plaintiff has stated a cognizable Bivens claim for relief. Therefore, the Court will order service upon Defendants at this time.*fn3
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
1. The Clerk of the Court is directed to prepare a summons for each Defendant, and the United States Marshal is directed to serve the Summons, Complaint (docket entry #1), and this Order upon each Defendant without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefor.
2. If any of the Defendants are no longer FCI-FC employees, the registered agent of service shall file a SEALED Statement indicating the Defendant's last date of employment and his or her last known private mailing address.
Dated this 3rd day of ...