Tholson v. State of Alaska Department of Corrections

CourtDistrict Court, D. Alaska
DecidedAugust 16, 2024
Docket3:24-cv-00035
StatusUnknown

This text of Tholson v. State of Alaska Department of Corrections (Tholson v. State of Alaska Department of Corrections) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Alaska primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Tholson v. State of Alaska Department of Corrections, (D. Alaska 2024).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA

LEON THOLSON, Plaintiff, Case No. 3:24-cv-00035-SLG v. STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant. ORDER DIRECTING SERVICE & RESPONSE

On March 18, 2024, self-represented prisoner Leon Tholson (“Plaintiff”) filed a motion to amend his complaint, his proposed First Amended Complaint, and five exhibits.1 Plaintiff previously filed an application to proceed without prepaying the filing fee with his original complaint.2 The Court has now screened the First Amended Complaint in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e) and 1915A. Liberally construed,3 the First Amended Complaint contains sufficient facts, that accepted

as true, state a plausible claim under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized

1 Docket 8. 2 Docket 2. 3 See Eldridge v. Block, 832 F.2d 1132, 1137 (9th Cir. 1987) (“The Supreme Court has instructed the federal courts to liberally construe the ‘inartful pleading’ of pro se litigants.”) (citing Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365 (1982) (per curiam)); Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969) (citations omitted) (a federal court must accept the allegations as true, construe the pleadings in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and resolve all doubts in the plaintiff's favor). Persons Act (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc.4 This means that this case will not be summarily dismissed at this time but may proceed to the next stage of litigation. The Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

SCREENING STANDARD Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, a federal district court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.5 In this screening, a district court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that the action:

(i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.6

In conducting its screening review, a federal court must liberally construe a self-represented plaintiff’s complaint and give the plaintiff the benefit of the doubt.7 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED: 1. Plaintiff’s motion to file an amended complaint at Docket 8 is GRANTED. Docket 8-1 shall be the operative complaint in this action, with Exhibits 1-5 attached (Dockets 8-2 through 8-6).

4 Docket 8-1. 5 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915, 1915A. 6 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). 7 See Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010) (citing Bretz v. Kelman, 773 F.2d 1026, 1027 n.1 (9th Cir. 1985) (en banc)). Case No. 3:24-cv-00035-SLG, Tholson v. State of Alaska Department of Corrections 2. The First Amended Complaint has been screened pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Liberally construed, the Complaint contains sufficient facts, that accepted as true, state plausible claims for relief under the RLUIPA.

3. Plaintiff must be ready to diligently pursue the case to completion. Missing a deadline or failing to pursue a case may result in the dismissal of this action. 4. Plaintiff’s application to proceed without prepaying the filing fee at Docket 3 is GRANTED.

5. Plaintiff’s Motion for Defendant to Locate and Preserve Video at Docket 7 is DENIED. After Defendant appears in this action, Plaintiff may elect to propound a Request for Admission on Defendant as to whether there are any videos of protective custody prisoners taking part in group religious activities, pursuant to Rule 36 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

6. While federal law allows litigants to commence a civil action without prepaying the fees, prisoner plaintiffs remain obligated to pay the entire fee in “increments” or “installments,” until the entire $350 statutory filing fee is paid, regardless of the outcome of the action.8 The Court will issue a separate order on the collection of the filing fee.

8 28 U.S.C. § 1915. See also 28 U.S.C. § 1914, Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees at ¶ 14 (The $55 administrative fee for filing a civil action, suit, or proceeding in a district court “does not apply to applications for a writ of habeas corpus or to persons granted in forma pauperis status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.”). Case No. 3:24-cv-00035-SLG, Tholson v. State of Alaska Department of Corrections 7. If Plaintiff is released from custody while this case remains pending and the filing fee has not been paid in full, Plaintiff must, within 30 days of his release, either (1) pay the unpaid balance of his filing fee or (2) file a Non-Prisoner

Application to Waive the Filing Fee (Form PS11).9 Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this action. 8. The Court’s finding that Plaintiff may proceed without prepaying the filing fee entitles him to service of process by the United States Marshals Service, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d).

9. Formal service in this case is unnecessary because a representative of the State of Alaska’s Department of Law has indicated that it will accept service on behalf of the Department of Corrections. See District of Alaska Miscellaneous General Order No. 769. 10. The Clerk of Court shall immediately mail a copy of this order, the First

Amended Complaint and Exhibits at Docket 8-1 to 8-6, and the civil cover sheet at Docket 2 to: Mark Cucci Chief Assistant Attorney General State of Alaska Department of Law 1031 West 4th Avenue, Suite 200 Anchorage, AK 99501-1994

9 The Court’s template forms are available upon request from the Clerk’s office and on the Court’s website at https://www.akd.uscourts.gov/forms. Case No. 3:24-cv-00035-SLG, Tholson v. State of Alaska Department of Corrections 11. Defendant, represented by the Attorney General for the State of Alaska, shall have sixty (60) days from the date of this order to file an Answer or otherwise respond.10

12. All future papers sent to the Court must be identified with the name of the Court, the case number, the name of the Plaintiff and name of Defendants, and the title of the document, as illustrated on the first page of this order.11 13.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Jenkins v. McKeithen
395 U.S. 411 (Supreme Court, 1969)
Boag v. MacDougall
454 U.S. 364 (Supreme Court, 1982)
Hebbe v. Pliler
627 F.3d 338 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
Edward G. Eldridge v. Sherman Block
832 F.2d 1132 (Ninth Circuit, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Tholson v. State of Alaska Department of Corrections, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tholson-v-state-of-alaska-department-of-corrections-akd-2024.