Traylor v. Gary

Background

Rayco Traylor filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 concerning his ability to file grievances while imprisoned at MCF-Stillwater. He alleged that prison officials placed him on “grievance management” after he filed more than four grievances in a month and fourteen grievances in total. He claimed that limits on filing grievances violated his rights and affected complaints about meals, religion-related diet issues, medication distribution, strip searches, segregation, and other prison conditions.

Traylor also alleged that prison staff retaliated against him for filing grievances. He referred to disciplinary hearings, segregation, and a disciplinary report that he said was timed to increase his time in segregated custody. He sought injunctive relief, compensatory damages, and punitive damages. He also applied to proceed without prepaying fees or costs.

The court had ordered Traylor to pay an initial filing fee of $9.71. He did not pay it, and Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty recommended dismissing the complaint for failure to prosecute. Traylor objected, stating that he could not pay because he had no funds.

The fee issue and the earlier recommendation

The court held that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4) permits a prisoner who has no assets or means to pay to proceed without paying an initial fee. The court accepted Traylor’s representation for now and vacated the recommendation to dismiss the complaint for nonpayment.

The court then screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A. Screening is the court’s required early review of a prisoner’s complaint to determine whether it is frivolous, fails to state a legally sufficient claim, or seeks money from an immune defendant.

Claims against the Minnesota Department of Corrections

The court dismissed the claims against the Minnesota Department of Corrections because the Eleventh Amendment generally gives states and state agencies immunity from suit in federal court. The complaint did not show that Minnesota had consented to this type of suit or that Congress had removed that immunity.

Due-process claims

The court concluded that Traylor had not adequately pleaded a due-process claim. A prisoner must allege a protected liberty interest, which generally requires confinement conditions that impose an unusual and significant hardship compared with ordinary prison life. Traylor did not provide facts describing his segregated status or showing that it created that type of hardship.

The court also rejected the claim that Traylor had a constitutional right to file unlimited grievances. It stated that the Constitution does not require a state to create a prison grievance procedure and therefore does not require a prison to permit unlimited grievances. The court dismissed Traylor’s due-process claims.

First Amendment retaliation claim

The court held that Traylor adequately alleged the first two elements of a First Amendment retaliation claim at the pleading stage. Filing a prison grievance is protected activity when the prison provides a grievance procedure, and Traylor alleged adverse actions including grievance-management restrictions, discipline status, and forty-five days of segregation on allegedly fabricated charges.

But the court found that Traylor did not adequately allege the required causal connection between his grievances and those actions. He did not identify direct evidence, such as statements that he was being punished for filing grievances. He also did not provide a sufficiently precise timeline connecting his grievance filings to the adverse actions. The court characterized his allegations of causation as speculative and conclusory and dismissed the retaliation claim.

Filing-fee obligations

The court stated that Traylor had filed at least ten civil actions in the District of Minnesota, along with a notice of appeal in one matter. It calculated total mandatory filing fees of $4,005, of which Traylor had paid $396.85, leaving $3,608.15 unpaid as of the order’s date.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2), monthly payments equal to 20 percent of the preceding month’s income credited to Traylor’s prison account must be applied to each unpaid filing-fee obligation when the account balance would otherwise exceed $10. The court directed the Clerk of Court to notify MCF-Stillwater officials and other specified recipients of the remaining obligation and payment requirements.

Disposition

The court granted Traylor’s objection, vacated the Report and Recommendation, and dismissed Traylor’s complaint without prejudice. It denied the application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs as moot. The court also directed the Clerk to provide notice of Traylor’s remaining financial obligations and to serve the order on the specified prison, state, and corrections authorities.