The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Phil Gilbert United States District Judge
Plaintiff, currently incarcerated at FCI Greenville, has brought this pro se civil rights action pursuant to Bivensv. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Plaintiff claims that other inmates have threatened to kill him in general population but that prison officials will not place him in protective custody.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the Court is required to conduct a prompt threshold review of the complaint. Accepting Plaintiff's allegations as true, the Court finds that Plaintiff has articulated a colorable federal cause of action: Count 1: A claim against Defendant Warden James Cross, Unknown SHU Lieutenant, DHO B. Auterson and Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") for deliberate indifference to safety in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
Defendant Unknown SHU Lieutenant and DHO B. Auterson are dismissed from Count 1 with prejudice for the following reason: Plaintiff makes no allegations against him/her plausibly suggesting a right to relief. See Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). Plaintiff alleges that Unknown SHU Lieutenant simply informed Plaintiff about a BOP policy, and that DHO B. Auterson actually sent him to the SHU, not kept him out of it.
Defendant BOP is dismissed from Count 1 without prejudice for the following reason:
Bivens does not permit a suit against a federal agency. F.D.I.C. v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 483-86 (1994); King v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, 415 F .3d 634, 636 (7th Cir. 2005). To the extent Plaintiff seeks relief for good time credit revoked, he must file a separate suit under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
The Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion to supplement his complaint (Doc. 15) and DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to file the proposed document as a supplement to the complaint (Doc. 12).
The Court VACATES the portion of its order denying Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction (Doc. 11) and REINSTATES his motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. 5).
The following defendants are DISMISSED from this action with prejudice:
The following defendants are DISMISSED from this action ...