United States District Court, D. New Jersey
Parker, Plaintiff Pro Se.
B. SIMANDLE Chief U.S. District Judge.
Albert Parker seeks to bring a civil rights complaint against
Camden County Correctional Facility (“CCCF”) and
Warden David S. Owens (“Owens”) (collectively,
“Defendants”) 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: “I was forced to live in inhumane
conditions while incarcerated. Forced to sleep on cell floors
by a toilet getting urine on my mattress and clothing and
sheets. I was unable [sic] to wash my soiled
clothing only once a week causing skin breakouts. Sleeping on
a thin mattress on concrete left me with consistent back
pain. I was forced to shower in fungus filled showers.”
Complaint § III(C).
states that the alleged events giving rise to these claims
occurred: “June 2011.” Id. §
respect to alleged injuries from these events, Plaintiff
states: “Back neck rashes. [T]his [is] why I collect
di[s]ability.” Id. § IV.
seeks $5, 000 in relief. 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 ...