Source: http://ga.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20180111_0000416.SGA.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 18:40:01+00:00

Document:
SCOTT WILKES; NATHAN DEAL; and SAM OLENS, Respondents.
Petitioner, an inmate at Augusta State Medical Prison (“ASMP”) in Grovetown, Georgia, ostensibly brings this action seeking mandamus relief. After prompting from the Clerk of Court, (doc. no. 2), Petitioner paid the filing fee. Notwithstanding the payment of the filing fee, the case or any portion thereof may be dismissed if it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune to such relief. See Leal v. Georgia Dep't of Corr., 254 F.3d 1276, 1277-78 (11th Cir. 2001) (per curiam); 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
As set forth above, the case or any portion thereof may be dismissed if it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune to such relief. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) & 1915A. A claim is frivolous if it “lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). “Failure to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) is governed by the same standard as dismissal for failure to state a claim under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).” Wilkerson v. H & S, Inc., 366 F. App'x 49, 51 (11th Cir. 2010) (citing Mitchell v. Farcass, 112 F.3d 1483, 1490 (11th Cir. 1997)).
Finally, the Court affords a liberal construction to a pro se litigant's pleadings, holding them to a more lenient standard than those drafted by an attorney. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007); Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). However, this liberal construction does not mean that the Court has a duty to re-write the pleading. Snow v. DirecTV, Inc., 450 F.3d 1314, 1320 (11th Cir. 2006).
2. Petitioner Fails to State a Valid Claim for Relief.

References: v. 
 § 1915
 v. 
 § 1915
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.