Cotto v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

Background

Eddie Cotto, proceeding without a lawyer, sued the Federal Bureau of Prisons, the United States Department of Justice, and individual defendants identified as a warden, doctor, case manager, and unit counselors. He alleged that he was being denied all medical care. The court had previously granted his request to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.

Screening standard

The Prison Litigation Reform Act requires federal courts to screen prisoner complaints seeking relief from governmental entities or their officers or employees. The court must dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim for relief, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court's subject-matter jurisdiction. The court explained that it must read a complaint filed without a lawyer liberally, but the complaint still must contain enough factual allegations to make a claim plausible rather than merely possible.

Claims against the federal agencies

The court held that sovereign immunity generally prevents lawsuits against the federal government and its agencies unless immunity has been waived. The Federal Tort Claims Act provides a limited waiver for certain tort claims, including some claims for money damages based on federal employees' conduct within the scope of their employment. Before filing such a claim in federal court, a claimant generally must submit an administrative claim and receive a final written decision, or wait six months without one. The proper defendant for such a claim is the United States.

The court dismissed Cotto's medical-malpractice claims against the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the Department of Justice for failure to state a claim. It also dismissed any Federal Tort Claims Act claims against the United States without prejudice because Cotto did not allege that he had submitted the required administrative claim and received a final written decision, or that six months had passed without a decision. In its conclusion, the court treated the claims against the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the Department of Justice as claims against the United States and dismissed them without prejudice.

Service on individual defendants

Because Cotto was allowed to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront, the court ordered the Clerk of Court to prepare service forms and summonses for the individual defendants and deliver the necessary papers to the U.S. Marshals Service. The court extended the time for service to 90 days after the summonses were issued. It also required Cotto to notify the court in writing if his address changed and warned that the action could be dismissed if he failed to do so.

Disposition

Judge Analisa Torres ordered service on the individual defendants, dismissed the agency-related claims as stated above, and certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The court therefore denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.