United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT February 17, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-20733
Summary Calendar
LORENZO LEWIS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
GARY L. JOHNSON; DALE STORY; MIKE MANGHAM;
MCLENDON, Officer; JAMES LESTER WALKER,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(H-02-CV-1707)
Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Lorenzo Lewis, Texas prisoner # 738181, appeals, pro se, the
summary judgment dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims. Lewis’s
claims are reviewed de novo. E.g., Skotak v. Tenneco Resins, Inc.,
953 F.2d 909, 912 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 832 (1992).
The use of black-box handcuff apparatuses to restrain
prisoners during transportation is not violative of the Eighth
Amendment. See Fulford v. King, 692 F.2d 11, 14 (5th Cir. 1982).
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
Lewis is not entitled to damages for any mental or emotional injury
allegedly suffered when these restraints were applied to him in a
vertical position, because any physical injury he suffered was de
minimis. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e); Alexander v. Tippah County,
Miss., 351 F.3d 626, 631 (5th Cir. 2003). Furthermore, because the
use of such apparatuses does not offend the Constitution, Lewis is
not entitled, under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, to their use
being enjoined. See 18 U.S.C. § 3626(a)(1)(A).
Finally, Lewis does not brief the issue whether the district
court erred in not certifying a class action pursuant to FED. R.
CIV. P. 23; therefore, that issue is waived. See Yohey v. Collins,
985 F.2d 222, 225 (5th Cir. 1993).
AFFIRMED
2