Omran v. USA
5:18-cv-00352
| W.D. La. | Mar 21, 2018Background
- Plaintiff Mohamed Abdallah Omran, a three‑strikes litigant, seeks permission to file a pro se Bivens suit against federal and LaSalle Parish Detention Center (LPDC) officials alleging denial of postage for legal mail and failure to respond to grievances.
- Omran previously raised the postage/access‑to‑courts claim in a mandamus motion in his criminal case; the district court and the Fifth Circuit rejected it and noted the proper vehicle would be Bivens.
- The Fifth Circuit found LPDC provided sufficient mailing materials and postage to file a certiorari petition, which Omran did, and that the envelopes supplied were an adequate method.
- Omran also alleges a due‑process right to receive responses to LPDC grievances; Fifth Circuit precedent holds prisoners have no federally protected liberty interest in grievance outcomes.
- Omran is subject to an order requiring prior judicial authorization to file new civil complaints and is barred from proceeding in forma pauperis absent imminent danger of serious physical injury.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether denial of adequate postage denied meaningful access to the courts | Omran: LPDC provided several #10 envelopes instead of a larger envelope, making certiorari filing impracticable and violating Bounds | Defendants: LPDC provided sufficient mailing materials and postage to file the petition; no constitutional denial | Court: Denied leave to file; previous Fifth Circuit ruling controls—no constitutional violation |
| Whether failure to respond to grievances violates due process | Omran: Has a due‑process right to receive responses from the grievance committee | Defendants: No federal liberty interest in grievance resolution; responses not constitutionally required | Court: Denied—Geiger precludes a due‑process claim based on grievance handling |
| Whether the complaint is duplicative / procedurally improper | Omran: Reasserts same claims now as a Bivens action after mandamus denied | Defendants: Previous adjudication and Fifth Circuit precedent dispose of the claims | Court: Denied as duplicative and futile; strike complaint |
| Whether Omran may proceed in forma pauperis or file without prior authorization | Omran: Seeks leave to file complaint | Defendants/Court: Omran is a three‑strikes litigant and subject to prior filing authorization order | Court: Denied permission to file; Clerk instructed to strike and close case |
Key Cases Cited
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (recognizing a cause of action for constitutional violations by federal officers)
- Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817 (prisoners entitled to adequate law library/assistance and postage to file claims)
- Doe v. Robertson, 751 F.3d 383 (defining Bivens actions in Fifth Circuit context)
- Geiger v. Jowers, 404 F.3d 371 (no federal liberty interest in having grievances resolved)
- Denson v. (unnamed), 603 F.2d 1146 (envelopes/methods that permit filing can satisfy access‑to‑courts requirements)