Case Name: William N. OLIVER, Plaintiff-Appellant v. The UNITED STATES; Federal Bureau of Prisons at FCI, Fort Worth, Texas, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-01-04
Citations: 456 F. App'x 465
Docket Number: No. 10-11086
Parties: William N. OLIVER, Plaintiff-Appellant v. The UNITED STATES; Federal Bureau of Prisons at FCI, Fort Worth, Texas, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before BARKSDALE, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 456
Pages: 465–466

Head Matter:
William N. OLIVER, Plaintiff-Appellant v. The UNITED STATES; Federal Bureau of Prisons at FCI, Fort Worth, Texas, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 10-11086
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Jan. 4, 2012.
William N. Oliver, Fort Worth, TX, pro se.
Before BARKSDALE, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
William N. Oliver, federal prisoner # 44269-004, proceeding pro se, challenges dismissal of his Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) complaint. The district court determined Oliver filed his FTCA complaint in August 2010, more than six months after the Department of Justice (DOJ) mailed a denial letter, date-stamped 27 May 2009, for Oliver's administrative-tort claim. The district court concluded the complaint was, therefore, untimely under the FTCA, 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b) (six-month deadline), and dismissed it under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (district court must dismiss prisoner's in forma pauperis complaint if frivolous or fails to state claim).
Review is de novo. E.g., Samford v. Dretke, 562 F.Sd 674, 678 (5th Cir.2009). Although time-barred claims are properly-dismissed under § 1915, Gonzales v. Wyatt, 157 F.3d 1016, 1019-20 (5th Cir. 1998), a discrepancy between the 27 May 2009 date stamp on the DOJ letter and events discussed in the letter occurring after that date suggests the date stamp may be incorrect. Consequently, we cannot determine whether the evidence supports the district court's conclusion.
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment is VACATED and this matter is REMANDED to district court to determine the limitations issue, after making appropriate factual findings on when the DOJ letter was mailed to Oliver.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.