Case Name: Eddie Dean FLUKER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Robert A. Hood; Harley Lappin; R. Derr; J.M. Bellantoni; John Ashcroft; P. Telitz; John Sheridan; K. Litvan, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-12-19
Citations: 83 F. App'x 311
Docket Number: No. 03-1271
Parties: Eddie Dean FLUKER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Robert A. Hood; Harley Lappin; R. Derr; J.M. Bellantoni; John Ashcroft; P. Telitz; John Sheridan; K. Litvan, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 83
Pages: 311–312

Head Matter:
Eddie Dean FLUKER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Robert A. Hood; Harley Lappin; R. Derr; J.M. Bellantoni; John Ashcroft; P. Telitz; John Sheridan; K. Litvan, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 03-1271.
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.
Dec. 19, 2003.
Eddie Dean Fluker, Florence, CO, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
John W. Suthers, U.S. Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney, Denver, CO, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before SEYMOUR, MURPHY, and O’BRIEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ORDER AND JUDGMENT DISMISSING FRIVOLOUS APPEAL
O'BRIEN, Circuit Judge.
Eddie Dean Fluker, a federal prisoner, filed complaints against the United States and its officers or employees, seeking damages and injunctive relief. The district court concluded his complaints were legally frivolous and dismissed them pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). He appeals, pro se. Like the original complaints, the appeal is frivolous and we dismiss it. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).
Relying on Rivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), and the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671-80, Fluker claims: 1) he was denied access to the courts because the prison does not have Colorado legal research materials, which he needs to pursue a medical malpractice claim, and 2) one defendant refused to photocopy certain documents for him. He also raises claims asserting he was retaliated against by various defendants when they filed fraudulent incident reports against him in violation of his constitutional rights.
We conclude Mr. Fluker's appeal is frivolous. We adopt the reasoning of the district court and DISMISS the appeal as frivolous. The dismissal of this appeal, combined with the district court's dismissal of his complaint as frivolous, means Mr. Fluker has accumulated two strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
. He filed two complaints, both asserting the same three claims.
. We construe pro se pleadings liberally. Ledbetter v. City of Topeka, 318 F.3d 1183, 1187 (10th Cir.2003).
. "In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted...." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).