Opinion
Civil Action No. 11 -0927 (UNA)
10-13-2011
Anthony Askew, Plaintiff, v. William K. Suter et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff has filed a "Petition to Reinstate Bivens Complaint," which was dismissed on September 8, 2011, for his failure to comply with the filing fee requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act by providing his inmate trust fund account statement.1 See Order (Sept. 8, 2011). Plaintiff has included the requested statement with his petition; therefore, the Court will grant the motion to reinstate the case and grant plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis. Upon its review of the complaint, however, the Court must dismiss the case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(2) (requiring dismissal of a prisoner's complaint upon a determination that the complaint, among other grounds, seeks monetary relief from an immune defendant).
Plaintiff, a prisoner at the Hazelton United States Penitentiary in Bruceton Mills, West Virginia, sues Supreme Court Clerk William K. Suter and Case Analyst Kyle R. Ratliff for monetary damages under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). The complaint arises from defendants' processing of plaintiffs Petition for Writ of Certiorari, which was denied on February 22, 2011. Compl. ¶ 10; Askew v. U.S., 131 S.Ct. 1534 (Mem).
Court clerks "are [absolutely] immune from damage suits" for actions taken, as alleged here, within the scope of their official duties as "an integral part of the judicial process." Sindram v. Suda, 986 F.2d 1459, 1460 (D.C. Cir. 1993); accord Hilska v. Suter, 308 Fed. Appx. 451, 452 (D.C. Cir. 2009). A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
________________________
United States District Judge