1. A prisoner who is allowed to proceed in forma pauperis in this court will have his complaint screened
in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). This screening procedure requires the court to
dismiss a prisoner’s civil action prior to service of process if it determines that the complaint is frivolous, malicious,
fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary damages from a defendant who is immune
from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii).
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-CV-770-MHT
RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
In this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, Dennis Nelson [“Nelson”], an inmate confined at a
correctional facility in Comstock, New, York, complains that in December of 2005 Regions
Bank [“Regions”] failed to provide him “blank checks” upon his opening an account.
Plaintiff’s Complaint at 2. Nelson asserts he now has no access to his funds because he does
not remember the address for Regions. Id. at 3.
Upon review of the complaint, the court concludes that dismissal of this case is
appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).
An essential element of a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action is that a person acting under color
of state law whose conduct is reasonably attributable to the State committed the alleged
constitutional deprivation. American Manufacturers Mutual Ins. Co. v. Sullivan, 526 U.S.
Case 2:06-cv-00770-MHT-DRB Document 4 Filed 08/29/2006 Page 1 of 4
Nelson v. Regions Bank (INMATE1)
2. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct.
1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971).
40, 119 S.Ct. 977, 985, 143 L.Ed.2d 130 (1999); Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527 (1981);
Willis v. University Health Services, Inc., 993 F.2d 837, 840 (11 Cir. 1993). To state a