2007 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 1-31-2007 

# Awal a v . N J D ept C orr P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 05-4899

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2007 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " Awal a v . N J D ept C orr " (2007). 2007 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1720. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007/1720C L D - 90 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 05- 4899

_____________ G B E K E M IC H A E L A W A L A , an d th e p e o p le o f S a lem C o u n ty C o rr e c tio n a l F a c ility P ri s o n e rs ; J A M E S M O P H E R S O N , J R .; H A R R Y G R E G O R Y ; D A N IE L W R IG H T ; D A L E G O L D B E R G ; R O B E R T L A U T E ; JA Y C S E H ; D U A N E C A R P E N T E R ; BRI AN DA VI S; THO M AS LO VETT; M I CH AEL J . GA LLAG HER v. STA TE O F N EW J ER SEY D EPA RT M EN T O F CO RR EC TI O N S; S AL E M CO UNT Y C OR RE CT I ONAL F AC I L I T Y; WARDE N;

H E F N E R , U n d e rsh e rif

f , S a lem C o u n tyJa il G beka M i chae l A w al a, A ppel l ant

________________________ O n A p p ea l Fro m the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt

Forthe D i s tr i ctof N ew J er s ey ( D . C . C i vi l N o. 05- cv- 02362) D i s tr i ctJ udge: H onor abl e Fr eda L. W ol fs on

_________________________ S u b mi t t e d F o rP o s s i b l e Di s mi s s a l Un d e r2 8 U. S . C. § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) ( B) D ece m ber29, 2006 B efore: R E N D E L L , S M ITH and C O W E N , C i rcui tJudg es.

( Fi l ed: J anuary31, 2007)

_______________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

_______________2

P E R C UR I AM G beke M i chae l A w al a appe al s the di s m i s s al of hi s compl ai ntunder28 U . S. C . §§ 1915( e) ( 2) ( B ) & 1915A ( b) . Forthe r eas ons s t at ed her ei n, w e w i l l di s m i s s thi s appea l u n d er 2 8 U . S . C . § § 1 9 1 5 (e)(2)(B ). O n M ay4, 2005, A w al a s ubm i t t ed the under l y i ng compl ai ntt o the U ni t ed St at es D i s tr i ctC our tforthe D i s tr i ctof N ew J er s ey . H e purpor t ed t o fi l e i tas a cl as s act i on on b e h a lf o f h im se lf a n d e lev e n o th e r in m a tes a t th e S a lem C o u n tyC o rre c tio n a l F a c ili ty (“ S C C F ” ). H is p rim a ryc laim w a s th a t th e yw e re d e n ied m e a n in g f u l ac c e ss to th e c o u rts due t o the l i br arys t aff’ s fai l ur e t o as s i s ti nm at es i n the pr epar at i on and fi l i ng of l egal paper s and t o pr ovi de ade quat e r es ear ch fa ci l i t i es . H e s oughtaddi t i onal as s i s t ance i n the l aw l i br ary , i ncr eas ed s pace form or e i nm at es t o us e i tatonce, and i ncr eas ed t i m e dur i ng w hi ch i nm at es coul d have a cce s s t o the l i br ary . A w al a al s o fl eet i ngl yr efe rr ed t o the f o llo w in g c laim s: (i) la c k o f a c c e ss to m e d ica l trea tm e n t an d p o o r m e d ica l ca re , (ii ) uns ani t aryfood pr epar at i on, and ( i i i ) nutr i t i onal l yi nadequa t e food. H ow ever , he p ro v id e d n o a d d itio n a l in f o rm a tio n w ith re s p e c t to a n yo f th e s e th re e c la im s . O n J une 10, 2005, A w al a i nform ed the C our tthathe had be en tr ans ferr ed t o the Feder al D et ent i on C ent eri n Phi l adel phi a. T w o w eeks l at er , he fi l ed an a m ended compl ai nt , s uppl ement i ng hi s al l egat i ons r egar di ng hi s l ack of acc es s t o the court s . T he D i s tr i ctC our tdi s m i s s ed A w al a’ s compl ai ntand amended compl ai ntunder28 U . S. C . §§ 1 9 1 5 (e )(2 )(B ) & 1 9 1 5 A (b ), co n c lu d in g th a t as a p ro se p riso n e r w ith o u t f o rm a l train in g inA l though t he part i es w er e advi s ed thatthi s appea l m i ghtbe di s m i s s ed forl ack of 1 j ur i s di ct i on, i n l i ghtof the D i s tr i ctC our tgr antof A ppel l ant ’ s m ot i on foran ext ens i on of t i m e pur s uantt o Feder al R ul e of A ppel l at e Pr ocedur e 4( a) ( 5) , w e dec l i ne t o di s m i s s t he appea l on thatgr ound. 3 the l aw w ho i s no l ongerbei ng det ai ned i n the s ame pr i s on fac i l i tyas the otherpr opos ed cl ass m em bers, A w al a w ou l d n ot be abl e t o ad equ at el yrepr esentthe int eres t s of t he clas s and m ai ntai n the sui tas a cl ass act i on , and that he had fai l ed to st at e a cl ai m for r el i ef so a s to s u p p o rt th o s e c la im s a s s e rt e d b yh im o n h is o w n b e h a lf. W e hav e j uri sdi ct i on ov er this app eal pu rs uan tt o 2 8 U . S . C . § 1 29 1. B ecause 1 A w a la h a s b e e n g ra n ted in f o r ma pau peri s st atus pu rs uan tt o 2 8 U . S . C . § 1 91 5, w e m ust f i r s tr e v i e w th i s a p p e a l f o rp o s s i b l e d i s mi s s a l p u r s u a n tt o 2 8 U. S . C. § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) ( B) . An a p p e a l m a yb e d is m is s e d u n d e r § 1 9 1 5 (e ) i f it h a s n o a rg u a b le b a s is in la w o r f a c t. N e itz k e v . W illia m s , 4 9 0 U .S . 3 1 9 , 3 2 5 (1 9 8 9 ). N one of A w al a’ s cl ai m s , as s t at ed, have a r guabl e l egal m er i t . A s t o hi s cl ai m s of l ack of acc es s t o t he court s , A w al a fa i l s t o al l ege a nyactual i nj uryemanat i ng fr om the l ack of r es our ces i n the pr i s on l i br ary . See Lew i s v. C as ey , 518 U . S. 343, 351 ( 1996) ( hol di ng thatan i nm at e al l egi ng l ack of acc es s t o the court s m us tdemonstr at e thatthe al l eged s hor t comi ngs of the pr i s on l i br aryhi nder ed hi s abi l i tyt o pur s ue an a ctual l egal c laim ). W ith re sp e c t to h is c laim o f in a d e q u a te m e d ica l trea tm e n t, A w a la h a s f a iled to all eg e a n ym ed ical ne ed at all , letalon e a seriou s m ed ical ne ed to w h ich A p p ell ee s w ere del i ber at el yi ndi ffe r ent . See Est el l e v. G ambl e, 429 U . S. 97, 104- 05 ( 1976) ( hol di ng t hat4

r el i ef i s avai l abl e underthe Ei ghth A m endmentfordel i ber at e i ndi ffe r ence t o a s er i ous m e d ica l n e e d ). A n d f

in a lly , reg a rd in g h is c laim th a t th e p riso n f o o d is n u triti o n a lly i nadequa t e and s erved i n an uns ani t arym anner , A w al a has notal l eged a depr i vat i on s er i ous enough t o r i s e t o t he l evel of an Ei ghth A m endmentvi ol at i on. See W i l s on v. S e iter, 5 0 1 U .S . 2 9 4 , 2 9 8 -9 9 (1 9 9 1 ) (re q u irin g p lain tiff to a lleg e f

a c ts s u f f icie n t to demonstr at e both ( i ) an obj ect i vel ys er i ous depr i vat i on of an i dent i fi abl e human need and (i i) th a t a p ri s o n o f

f ic ia l a c te d w ith d e lib e ra te in d if f e re n c e in e f

f e c tin g th e d e p ri v a tio n ). I n l i ghtof the for egoi ng, w e conc l ude thatthe D i s tr i ctC our tcorr ect l ydi s m i s s ed A w ala’s co m p lai n t and am en d ed co m p lai n t un d er 2 8 U . S . C . § § 1 9 1 5 (e)(2)(B ) & 1915A ( b) aft eraff

or di ng hi m an opportuni tyt o amend and cl ar i fyhi s compl ai nt . See G ray so n v . M ay v iew S tat e H o sp . , 2 9 3 F . 3 d 1 0 3 , 1 1 4 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 2 ). W e the ref o re concl ude thatthi s appea l i s m er i t l es s . A ccor di ngl y , thi s appea l w i l l be di s m i s s ed under 2 8 U . S . C . § 1 9 1 5 (e)(2)(B ).