United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Roanoke Division
RANDALL J. KEYSTONE, Plaintiff,
P. SCARBERRY, ET AL., Defendants.
JAMES C. TURK, Senior District Judge.
Randall J. Keystone, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that prison officials at Red Onion State Prison are not providing him sufficient food, in violation of his constitutional rights. The court finds that the action must be summarily dismissed as frivolous.
Liberally construing Keystone's complaint, he alleges the following claims: (1) since Defendant Scarberry took over as Food Service Director at Red Onion, Keystone has not received sufficient food; (2) food service does not serve fruit as required under the "master menu, " in violation of Virginia Department of Corrections ("VDOC") policy; (3) food service omits condiments from Keystone's meal tray "most of the time"; (4) food service does not serve biscuits and burns as required under the VDOC "master menu"; (5) food service serves inmates "improper sized and outdated cookies"; (6) food service serves "water[ed]down koolaids"; and (7) food service does not post weekly menus as required. See Compl. 6, 7, 10, 11. Keystone claims that, as a result of these problems with food service, he has suffered weight loss, headaches, constipation, and other discomforts, none of which has led him to seek medical treatment. His complaint also offers no indication that he has sought a medical evaluation of the possible causes or health consequences of his weight loss or other symptoms. As relief, he seeks $48, 000 in damages and injunctive relief ordering officials to follow the master menu and to provide meals totaling 2800 calories per day or more "ASAP." Compl. 14.
The court is required to dismiss any action or claim filed by a prisoner against a governmental entity or officer if the court determines the action or claim is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). Keystone's current claims and factual allegations are nearly identical to the claims and supporting allegations he raised in a prior § 1983 complaint, which the court summarily dismissed under § 1915A(b)(1) legally as frivolous. See Keystone v. Scarberry, Case No. 7:13CV00399 (W.D. Va. 2013). For the same reasons stated in the court's memorandum ...