IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-20470
Summary Calendar
JUAN JORGE SANCHEZ,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
ROY PUTSKA; MICHAEL BLUMBERG;
JOHNNY SAND; T.C. MOSSEY, Captain,
Defendants-Appellees.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-96-CV-1607
- - - - - - - - - -
August 10, 1999
Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Juan Jorge Sanchez, a Texas prisoner (# 577512), has
appealed from the district court’s denial of his FED. R. CIV. P.
60(b) motion for relief from judgment, following the court’s
dismissal of his civil rights complaint as frivolous. Sanchez
had asserted in his complaint that: he was bitten by a snake
when he was working with other inmates in a field; the defendants
had failed ensure the safety of the work environment; the
defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
needs after the snake bite; and Sanchez was later reassigned to
work in the field without a medical evaluation. The district
court did not abuse its discretion in denying Rule 60(b) relief
as to these claims, most of which involve only allegations of
negligence only and are not actionable under § 1983. See Johnson
v. Treen, 759 F.2d 1236, 1238 (5th Cir. 1985); Travelers Ins. Co.
v. Liljeberg Enterprises, Inc., 38 F.3d 1404, 1408 (5th Cir.
1994).
Sanchez also alleged that, after he refused to work, he was
disciplinarily sanctioned with the loss of good conduct time
credits; he asserted that his disciplinary proceedings were
conducted without him being present in violation of his due
process rights. Although it is possible such allegations state a
cognizable 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim, see Madison v. Parker, 104
F.3d 765, 769 (5th Cir. 1997), the district court did not abuse
its discretion in denying Sanchez Rule 60(b) relief as to this
set of claims because Sanchez’s allegations have been too vague
and conclusional to establish the personal involvement of any
specific defendant. See Travelers Ins. Co., 38 F.3d at 1408;
Lozano v. Smith, 718 F.2d 756, 768 (5th Cir. 1983).
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
AFFIRMED.