United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division
OPINION AND ORDER 
SHERIPOLSTERCHAPPELL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff John Glenn
Houtsma's Amended Complaint (Doc. #9) filed on
January 4, 2018. Accompanying his Complaint, Plaintiff moved
to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. #2).
December 12, 2017, the Court dismissed Plaintiff's
Complaint (Doc. #1) under § 1915 for failure to
state a claim. (Doc. #8) but allowed Plaintiff to
file an Amended Complaint. Because Plaintiff seeks to proceed
in forma pauperis, the Court must review his Amended
Complaint to determine whether it is frivolous, malicious, or
fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii).
With that standard in mind, the Court will examine
Plaintiff's Amended Complaint.
is an involuntarily committed resident of the Florida Civil
Commitment Center (“FCCC”) in Arcadia, Florida.
Plaintiff asserts that between March 2015 and May 2016, he
had a physical altercation with fellow resident Resverd
Forde. (Doc. #9 at 5). Plaintiff claims facility
administrators knew that if Plaintiff was placed in the same
dormitory with Forde, Forde would assault him. Id.
and Defendant Forde got into an altercation over
Plaintiff's use of the telephone. Id. Plaintiff
reported the incident to officers Christopher Catron and
Donald Sawyer. Id. Plaintiff wants both Defendants
held liable for not providing him a safe and risk- free
environment. He asks for compensatory damages of $800.00 for
each Defendant and punitive damages of $60, 000.
federal district court must review a civil complaint filed
in forma pauperis and dismiss any such complaint
that is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The
mandatory language of 28 U.S.C. § 1915 applies to all
proceedings in forma pauperis. Section 1915
Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that
mayhave been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any
time if the court determines that-
(A) the allegation of poverty is untrue; or
(B) the action or appeal-
(i) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted;
(iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune