Pupo v. Stalder ( 1995 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-30126
Conference Calendar
__________________
JOSE F. PUPO,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
RICHARD L. STALDER, Warden,
Defendant-Appellee.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
USDC No. CA-94-1690
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
June 28, 1995
Before JONES, WIENER, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jose F. Pupo, a Louisiana state prison inmate, appeals from
the district court's dismissal of his § 1983 complaint pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). Pupo does not address the district
court's determination that he has no standing, but argues instead
that the court abused its discretion because he presented the
nonfrivolous issues (1) whether the district court should oversee
prison officials' adherence to the court-approved administrative
*
Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions
that have no precedential value and merely decide particular
cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes
needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal
profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published.
No. 95-30126
-2-
grievance procedure, and (2) whether the failure to apply the
grievance procedure correctly is a constitutional violation.
States are authorized "to set up prison grievance procedures
which district courts can order prisoners to exhaust before
proceeding with their civil rights suits." Martin v.
Catalanotto, 895 F.2d 1040, 1041 (5th Cir. 1990); see 42 U.S.C.
§ 1997e. Such procedures must be approved by the Attorney
General or a federal district court before a court can order
exhaustion of the procedure. Martin, 895 F.2d at 1041. The
United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana
has approved Louisiana's prison administrative procedures as
meeting § 1997e's minimum standards. Id. at 1042. Pupo may not
challenge that determination now. See Gartrell v. Gaylor, 981
F.2d 254, 258 (5th Cir. 1993); see also 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(d)
(providing that "[t]he failure of a State to adopt or adhere to
an administrative grievance procedure consistent with this
section shall not constitute the basis for an action under
section 1997a or 1997c of this title").
Because Pupo's motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis
(IFP) presents no issue of arguable merit and is thus frivolous,
see Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983), IFP is
DENIED and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
Pupo's "Motion For Probably [sic] Cause" is DENIED as
unnecessary.