Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-03231/USCOURTS-ca10-90-03231-0/pdf.json

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

---

,. 

,. 

UNITED STATES 

FILED 

United States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Cir~it 

COURT OF APPEALS FEB 211991 

FOR THE TERTII CIRCUIT 

JORGE LUIS LOPEZ, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

R. L. MATTHEWS; MR. O'CONNOR; 

and DEFENDANT RAY, Captain, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 90-3231 

(D.C. No. 90-3174) 

(D. Kansas) 

ORDER ARD JUDGMENT* 

Submitted on the Briefs: 

Before McKAY, MOORE, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

This is an appeal from an order dismissing a prose complaint 

filed by a prisoner for failure to exhaust administrative 

remedies. The case is before us on plaintiff's motion to proceed 

in forma pauperis. 

*This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 90-3231 Document: 010110103820 Date Filed: 02/21/1991 Page: 1 
After construing the complaint as a claim of continuing 

unlawful conditions of confinement and denial of medical care, the 

district court concluded the administrative remedies established 

by the Bureau of Prisons would provide plaintiff with a remedial 

process. In reliance upon Brice v. Day, 604 F.2d 664, 667 (10th 

Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1086 (1980), the court 

dismissed the complaint without prejudice. 

Mr. Lopez appeals on the ground that his complaint was a 

Bivens action for damages based upon completed acts; therefore, he 

argues Brice is inapposite. Our review of the record leads us to 

the conclusion this argument is without force. 

Even given the liberal construction to which a pro se 

pleading is entitled, the complaint does not escape the parameters 

of Brice. First, the averments are all generalities. We cannot 

find any claim of specific fact to support a Bivens action. 

Second, the bald contention that the complaint was intended as a 

Bivens claim will not protect it from the requirement that a 

prisoner exhaust administrative remedies. 

Indeed, in Brice the plaintiffs contended they should not 

have to resort to Bureau of Prisons remedies because the acts upon 

which their claims were predicated were completed and recognized 

by Bivens. In disregarding that claim, we said: "Thus, if we 

assume that the petitions before us could indicate a Bivens cause 

of action as the appellants argue, we must nevertheless require an 

initial administrative inquiry." Brice, 604 F.2d at 666. 

The order of the district court requiring Mr. Lopez to seek 

administrative relief was entirely proper. We note, however, in 

-2-

Appellate Case: 90-3231 Document: 010110103820 Date Filed: 02/21/1991 Page: 2 
dismissing the complaint without prejudice, the court left open to 

plaintiff the right of judicial action upon completion of that 

process. 

We conclude plaintiff can make no rational argument on the 

law or facts in support of the appeal. Therefore, the motion to 

proceed without prepayment of costs or fees is DENIED. 

Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962); Ragan v. Cox, 305 

F.2d 58 (10th Cir. 1962). 

Entered for the Court 

John P. Moore 

Circuit Judge 

-3-

Appellate Case: 90-3231 Document: 010110103820 Date Filed: 02/21/1991 Page: 3