United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 22, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-10906
Summary Calendar
MUQTASID A. QADIR
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
GARY L. JOHNSON, Sued in his individual and
official capacity, ET AL.,
Defendants,
ROBERT EASON, Individual and official capacity; GARY L. COOK,
Individual and official capacity, also known as Cary Cook;
GREGORY OLIVER, Individual and official capacity, also know as
G. Oliver; RICHARD THOMAS, Individual and official capacity;
TERRI CANTRELL, Individual and official capacity; D.F. FONDREN,
Individual and official capacity; EMILY DOAN, Individual and
official capacity; GAYLN COFFMAN, Individual and official
capacity; DAVID SCOTT, also known as D. Scott; BONNIE YOUNG,
CAROLYN HAVENS, also known as NFN Havens; BOB PREWITT, also know
as R. Prewitt; TOMMY SOUTHARD, also known as T. Southard,
Defendants-Appellees.
________________________________________________
MUQTASID A. QADIR, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
GARY L. JOHNSON; ET AL.,
Defendants,
R. EASON, Warden; C. COOK, Warden; FNU AVANTS, Captain,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC Nos. 1:01-CV-167 c/w 1:01-CV-186
--------------------
Before JOLLY, WIENER, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Plaintiff-Appellant Muqtasid A. Qadir, Texas prisoner #743563,
appeals the dismissal of his pro se, in forma pauperis (IFP) 42
U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. In his complaint, he raised claims of
failure to protect, retaliation, deliberate indifference, and
flawed disciplinary proceedings.
We note as an initial matter that Qadir does not argue that
the district court erred in finding that his challenge to his
disciplinary proceedings was barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S.
477 (1994). Thus, we deem this issue to be abandoned. Yohey v.
Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993).
Qadir’s claims that he was denied medical treatment and that
the defendants failed to protect him from other inmates fail
because he has not shown that the defendants acted with deliberate
indifference. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994).
Qadir’s claims of retaliation fail to set forth a chronology of
events from which retaliation may plausibly be inferred. See Woods
v. Smith, 60 F.3d 1161, 1166 (5th Cir. 1995).
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
2
The district court’s dismissal as frivolous of Qadir’s 42
U.S.C. § 1983 complaint counts as one strike for the purposes of 28
U.S.C. § 1915(g). Qadir is warned that if he accumulates three
strikes, he may not proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal while
he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is in
imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(g).
AFFIRMED; STRIKE WARNING ISSUED.
3