IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-31061
Conference Calendar
JOHN LEE CARTER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
BURL CAIN, Warden; JAMES LEBLANC;
B.C. ROGERS POULTRY, INC.; JACKSON FARMS;
DAVID MILLER CRAWFISH UNLIMITED; MICHAEL SULLIVAN;
CHARLES KLEINPETER, Director,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
USDC No. 96-CV-139
- - - - - - - - - -
April 15, 1997
Before REAVLEY, DAVIS, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
John Lee Carter, Louisiana prisoner No. 84791, has moved for
leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) in this appeal from the
dismissal of certain of his civil rights claims as frivolous
pursuant to U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and the dismissal of other
claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies as required
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 96-31061
- 2 -
by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Carter’s motion to appeal IFP is
GRANTED.
A prison official having certified that the average monthly
deposit to Carter’s account during the preceding six months is
$23.33, we ASSESS an initial partial filing fee of $4.66. After
payment of the initial partial filing fee to the clerk of the
district court, Carter shall make monthly payments of twenty
percent of the preceding month’s income credited to his account.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The agency having custody of Carter
is directed to forward payments from his prisoner account to the
clerk of the district court each time that the amount in his
account exceeds $10 until the filing fee of $105 is paid. See
id.
Carter argues in this court that his prison work assignment
constitutes slave labor; that inmates assigned to the “chicken
plant” at Dixon Correctional Institute are wrongly deprived of
“good-time” credits; that he should be awarded punitive damages
for the physical and mental stress he has suffered; and that the
defendants made it impossible for him to exhaust prison
administrative remedies as to his retaliation claim.
We have reviewed the record and Carter’s motion for IFP and
hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion by
dismissing Carter’s “slave labor” claim as frivolous or
dismissing his retaliation claim for failure to exhaust
administrative remedies. See Watson v. Graves, 909 F.2d 1549,
No. 96-31061
- 3 -
1552 (5th Cir. 1990); 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Carter’s
conclusional allegation that chicken plant workers are wrongly
deprived of “good-time” is insufficient to state a claim under
§ 1983. See Hale v. Harney, 786 F.2d 688, 690 (5th Cir. 1986).
We hold that Carter’s claim for punitive damages is frivolous.
Carter has failed to brief any issue with respect to the
dismissal of the other claims which he raised in the district
court; therefore, those claims are abandoned. Brinkmann v.
Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.
1987).
Carter’s appeal is without arguable merit and, thus,
frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.
1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See
5th Cir. R. 42.2.
Carter is cautioned that any future frivolous appeals filed
by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of sanctions.
Carter is cautioned further to review any pending appeals to
ensure that they do not raise arguments that are frivolous.
IFP GRANTED; FEE ASSESSED; APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION
WARNING ISSUED.