Acevedo v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
OCT 2 2003
TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
LOUIE M. ACEVEDO,
Plaintiff-Appellant, No. 03-4140
v. District of Utah
R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO CO., (D.C. No. 2:02-CV-465 TC)
Defendant-Appellee.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before TACHA , Chief Judge, McKAY and McCONNELL , Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination
of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). This case is
therefore submitted without oral argument.
Louie M. Acevedo, a prisoner in the custody of the State of Utah, filed this
civil rights complaint against R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983. According to his complaint, he started smoking at the age of 11, and
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
*
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
recently, at the age of 47, suffered severe health problems relating to his
continued and heavy tobacco use.
The district court dismissed his suit on the ground that R.J. Reynolds is a
private entity, not liable under § 1983 in the absence of proof that the company
acted under color of state law. In his handwritten brief in this Court, where he
appears pro se, Mr. Acevedo offers no argument in response to the district court’s
reasoning, in the apparent misapprehension that his suit was dismissed for failure
to pay filing fees.
Seeing no error in the district court’s analysis, we AFFIRM the judgment of
the district court.
Entered for the Court
Michael W. McConnell
Circuit Judge
-2-