Toomes v. U.S.P. Cannon
3:17-cv-00744
M.D. Penn.Jun 26, 2017Background
- Plaintiff Thomas Toomes, a federal inmate at USP-Canaan, sued under Bivens and the FTCA for injuries from an alleged assault by a corrections officer on August 29, 2013.
- He sought compensatory and punitive damages and filed to proceed in forma pauperis.
- The complaint was signed/mailed on April 24, 2017.
- The court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim.
- The court found both the Bivens and FTCA claims time-barred on their face and further found the FTCA claim procedurally deficient for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
- The court concluded amendment would be futile and dismissed the complaint.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of Bivens claim (statute of limitations) | Toomes argues the assault claim is properly before the court | Implicit defense: claim accrued in 2013 and suit filed in 2017, outside two-year state limitation | Dismissed — Bivens claim barred by Pennsylvania two-year statute; accrual on assault date (Aug 29, 2013) |
| Tolling / discovery rule for Bivens claim | Toomes may argue later discovery of severity or concealment tolled limitations | Defendants (court) — injury and cause were known at time of assault; no facts supporting discovery or fraudulent concealment tolling | Denied — discovery and fraudulent-concealment tolling inapplicable; knowledge of injury at time of assault starts the limitations period |
| FTCA jurisdictional prerequisite (administrative exhaustion) | Toomes asserts FTCA claim but does not allege filing an administrative claim | United States requires presentation to appropriate agency and final denial before suit | Dismissed without prejudice — court lacks jurisdiction because Toomes did not allege exhaustion under 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a) |
| Timeliness of FTCA claim (statute of limitations) | Toomes did not show timely presentation to agency within two years of accrual | Court notes 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b) requires agency presentation within two years; no equitable tolling shown | Dismissed — FTCA claim also appears time-barred; no basis for equitable tolling shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) (establishes Bivens damages remedy against federal officers)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility pleading standard)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (limits conclusory allegations in pleadings)
- Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384 (2007) (use state personal-injury SOL for federal civil-rights claims)
- Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988) (prison mailbox rule for filing dates)
- Kach v. Hose, 589 F.3d 626 (3d Cir. 2009) (statute of limitations principles for Bivens in Third Circuit)
- McNeil v. United States, 508 U.S. 106 (1993) (administrative exhaustion required before FTCA suit)
- United States v. Kwai Fun Wong, 135 S. Ct. 1625 (2015) (FTCA time limits are nonjurisdictional but subject to dismissal when untimely)