United States District Court, D. New Jersey
RAYNARD E. WASHINGTON, Plaintiff,
CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, Defendant.
Raynard E. Washington, Plaintiff Pro Se.
B. SIMANDLE Chief U.S. District Judge.
Raynard E. Washington seeks to bring a civil rights complaint
against 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 dismiss the Complaint
with prejudice for failure to state a claim. 28 U.S.C. §
Complaint states in its entirety: “I was made to sleep
in rooms with 5 other inmates on the floor under toilet in
corners or sitting up. [T]he warden instructed the guards to
house inmates 4 to 5 inmates in a room and it was
overcrowded.” Complaint § III(C).
states that these alleged events occurred: “mid-2013 am
hours.” Id. § III(B).
alleges to have sustained boils, a sprained neck, back
spasms, sleep deprivation, nosebleeds and emotional distress.
Id. § IV.
respect to claims for relief, Plaintiff “would like
monetary payment for emotional distress and being treated
like an animal. So my value is priceless but whatever the law
allows I will accept so my fellow inmates can get relief as
well.” Id. § V. Plaintiff would
“like for all the rules to change to help future
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