Byrd v. United States of America et al., No. 1:2009cv01208 - Document 9 (E.D. Va. 2010)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Claude M. Hilton on 11/29/10. (klau, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Byrd v. United States of America et al. Doc. 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division Dwight Devane Byrd, Plaintiff, p 11 L E f NOV 2 9 2010 s CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA l:09cv!208(CMH/JFA) United States of America, et ah, Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Dwight Devane Byrd, a federal inmate confined in the Eastern District of Virginia and proceeding pro se, has filed a complaint on the form for use in civil rights actions pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that defendants failed to protect him from a racially-motivated assault by a fellow inmate at FCI Beckleyon April 26,2007. Plaintiff has paid the statutory filing fee. Because the defendants are federal entities, plaintiffs constitutional claim will be construed as brought pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics. 403 U.S. 388 (1971), which extends § 1983 liability to federal officials.1 It appears that plaintiffalso intends to assert a claim against the named defendants, the United States of America and the Federal Bureau of Prisons ("BOP"), pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346,2671, etseq. Afterreviewingplaintiffs complaint, the Bivens claim against defendants must be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(l) for failure to statea claim,2 and the claim underthe FTCAwill xIt is noted that plaintiff has utilized a form complaint captioned "Form to be Used by Prisoners in Filing a Complaint Under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, In the United States District Court for the Middle District ofNorth Carolina." Compl. at 1. Because the complaint was mailed to this Court for filing, it is assumed in light ofplaintiffs pro se status that the reference to North Carolina in the caption is a scrivener's error. 2 Section 1915A provides: (a) Screening.—The court shall review, before docketing, iffeasible or, in any event, Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
