United States District Court, D. New Jersey
OTTIS R. JACKSON, Plaintiff,
CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, Defendant.
R. Jackson Plaintiff Pro Se
B. SIMANDLE, Chief U.S. District Judge
Ottis R. Jackson seeks to bring a civil rights complaint
against the Camden County Correctional Facility
(“CCCF”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for
allegedly unconstitutional conditions of confinement.
Complaint, Docket Entry 1.
U.S.C. 1915(e)(2) requires a court to review complaints prior
to service in cases in which a plaintiff is proceeding in
forma pauperis. The Court must sua sponte
dismiss any claim that is frivolous, is malicious, fails to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks
monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief. This action is subject to sua
sponte screening for dismissal under Section
1915(e)(2)(B) because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma
reasons set forth below, the Court will: (1) dismiss the
Complaint with prejudice as to claims made against the CCJ
because defendant is not a “state actor” within
the meaning of § 1983; and (2) dismiss the Complaint
without prejudice for failure to state a claim. 28 U.S.C.
Complaint states: “Place[d] in over-crowded cells,
confined spaces with sick, violent and angry individuals.
Slept on floors because too many people were placed in the
cell. I told them that I had a bad back, a heart condition,
and PTSD. Correction officers failed to acknowledge my
medical condition with my bad back, heart condition, and
PTSD.” Complaint § III(C).
alleges to have suffered “severe back injuries from
sleeping on the floor, anxiety attacks, giving [sic]
no medical attention. Denied medication I take [sic]
before incarceration.” Id. § IV.
respect to the time of the alleged events giving rise to his
claims, Plaintiff states: “Detain [sic] on
more than one occasion[;] exact dates unknown[.] Anywhere
from 2002-2015 on.” Id. § III(B).
“would like the courts to compensate me for inhumane
treatment, overcrowding, ignoring my pleas to seek medical
attention, and the physical and mental anguish I suffered.
Violation of my civil rights. No amount of money can account
for my horrific experience. I'm seeking $250, 000.”
Id. § V.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
survive sua sponte screening under 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2) for failure to state a claim, a complaint must
allege “sufficient factual matter” to show that
the claim is facially plausible. Fowler v. UPMS
Shadyside, 578 F.3d 203, 210 (3d Cir. 2009) (citation
omitted). “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.” Fair Wind Sailing,
Inc. v. Dempster, 764 F.3d 303, 308 n.3 (3d Cir. 2014).
“[A] pleading that offers ‘labels or
conclusions' or ‘a formulaic recitation of the
elements of a cause of action will not do.'”
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555