514 F. App'x 88
3rd Cir.2013Background
- Thompson, an inmate at SCI Laurel Highlands, pro se, appeals a district court § 1915(e)(2)(B) dismissal.
- In 2009 Thompson moved from SCI Somerset (Level III) to Laurel Highlands (Level II).
- In April 2010 Thompson sought an incentive-based transfer; request denied for only five months at Level II.
- Grievance challenged denial and Thompson was placed in a high-intensity violence prevention program; grievance denied for refusing participation and untimely on appeal.
- In August 2010 Thompson filed a § 1983 complaint alleging retaliation for grievance activity and due process violations in transfer and grievance procedures.
- District Court dismissed on September 24, 2012; Thompson timely appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether retaliation claim is plausible | Thompson asserts denial of transfer violated First Amendment rights via retaliation for grievances. | Officials contended no causal link or protected conduct established; claim not plausible. | Retaliation claim potentially plausible; remanded for further proceedings. |
| Whether due process claims are actionable | Thompson alleges unfair process in transfer and grievance adjudication under DOC policy. | No constitutional right to specific grievance procedures or transfer outcome; not actionable. | Due process claims dismissed; not independently actionable. |
| Whether limitations/tolling affect Thompson's retaliation claim | Tolling during exhaustion may save claim from time bar. | Limitations require tolling analysis; exhaustion tolling not automatic. | Potential tolling issue requires further consideration; not dispositive at this stage. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (U.S. 2009) (pleading standards; plausibility required)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (U.S. 2007) (heightened pleading standard)
- Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238 (U.S. 1983) (no liberty interest in a particular place of confinement)
- Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472 (U.S. 1995) (no due process right to practice grievances; atypical hardship standard)
- Mitchell v. Horn, 318 F.3d 523 (3d Cir. 2003) (retaliation requires protected conduct, adverse action, and causal link)
- Brown v. Valoff, 422 F.3d 926 (9th Cir. 2005) (tolling during exhaustion; limitations considerations)
- Johnson v. Rivera, 272 F.3d 519 (7th Cir. 2001) (exhaustion tolling principles)
- Brown v. Morgan, 209 F.3d 595 (6th Cir. 2000) (exhaustion tolling applicable to filing)