Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_08-cv-08127/USCOURTS-azd-3_08-cv-08127-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

SC

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Eric John Meisner, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Anders Rosenquist, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 08-8127-PCT-DGC (ECV)

ORDER

Plaintiff Eric John Meisner, who is confined in the Fort Dix Federal Correctional

Institution in Fort Dix, New Jersey, has filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to

Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)

and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. (Doc.# 1, 3.) The Court will dismiss the

Complaint and this action without leave to amend.

I. Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Filing Fee

Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis will be granted. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a). Plaintiff must pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).

The Court will assess an initial partial filing fee of $42.30. The remainder of the fee will be

collected monthly in payments of 20% of the previous month’s income each time the amount

in the account exceeds $10.00. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The Court will enter a separate

Order requiring the appropriate government agency to collect and forward the fees according

to the statutory formula. 

II. Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints

The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against

Case 3:08-cv-08127-DGC--ECV Document 5 Filed 10/22/08 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

governmental entity or an officer or an employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if a plaintiff has raised

claims that are legally frivolous or malicious, that fail to state a claim upon which relief may

be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). If the Court determines that a pleading could be cured by the

allegation of other facts, a pro se litigant is entitled to an opportunity to amend a complaint

before dismissal of the action. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-29 (9th Cir. 2000)

(en banc). Plaintiff’s Complaint will be dismissed without leave to amend because the

defects cannot be cured. 

III. Complaint

Plaintiff alleges one claim for relief. He sues Anders Rosenquist and his law firm,

Rosenquist & Associates, and John or Jane Does affiliated with that law firm. Rosenquist

has been appointed as Plaintiff’s attorney on direct appeal of his federal conviction. Plaintiff

seeks declaratory, injunctive, compensatory, and punitive relief. 

IV. Failure to State a Claim

To state a Bivens claim, a plaintiff must allege that persons acting under color of

federal law violated his constitutional rights. Martin v. Sias, 88 F.3d 774, 775 (9th Cir. 1996)

(citing Van Strum v. Lawn, 940 F.2d 406, 409 (9th Cir. 1991)). Thus, an action under

Bivens is identical to one brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 except for the replacement

of a state actor under § 1983 by a federal actor under Bivens. Id. “[A] person acts under

color of state law only when exercising power ‘possessed by virtue of state law and made

possible only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state law.’” Polk

County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312, 317-18 (1981) (quoting United States v. Classic, 313 U.S.

299, 326 (1941)). 

Whether an attorney representing a criminal defendant on appeal is privately retained,

a public defender, or court-appointed counsel, he does not act under color of state law. See

Polk County, 454 U.S. at 317-18, 325; Miranda v. Clark County, Nevada, 319 F.3d 465, 468

(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). Just as an attorney does not act under color of state law in

Case 3:08-cv-08127-DGC--ECV Document 5 Filed 10/22/08 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 -

representing a criminal defendant in state court proceedings, an attorney does not act under

color of federal law in representing a criminal defendant in federal proceedings. Cox v.

Hellerstein, 685 F.2d 1098, 1099 (9th Cir. 1982). Therefore, a Bivens action cannot be

maintained against an appointed lawyer, even one employed by the federal government,

because he does not act under color of federal law. See Polk County, 454 U.S. at 317-18;

Haley v. Walker, 751 F.2d 284, 285 (8th Cir. 1984); Cox, 685 F.2d at 1099. 

Plaintiff sues all of the Defendants based solely on their representation of Plaintiff on

his direct appeal. Because none of the Defendants acted under “color of federal law,”

Plaintiff cannot state a Bivens claim against them. Plaintiff cannot cure this defect by

amendment. Accordingly, the Complaint and this action will be dismissed without leave to

amend. 

IT IS ORDERED: 

(1) Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is granted. (Doc.# 3.)

(2) As required by the accompanying Order to the appropriate government agency,

Plaintiff must pay the $350.00 filing fee and is assessed an initial partial filing fee of $42.30.

(3) The Complaint (doc.# 1) and this action are dismissed for failure to state a

claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), and the Clerk of Court must enter judgment

accordingly. 

(4) The Clerk of Court must make an entry on the docket stating that the dismissal

for failure to state a claim counts as a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

DATED this 21st day of October, 2008.

Case 3:08-cv-08127-DGC--ECV Document 5 Filed 10/22/08 Page 3 of 3