Cecil Davis v. USA, et al, No. 18-30399 (5th Cir. 2019)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 18-30399 Document: 00514902926 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/04/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 18-30399 Summary Calendar FILED April 4, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk CECIL MCDONALD DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; M. D. CARVAJAL, Warden, USP Pollock; L. SANDERS, Warden, MRC Springfield; JOEL ALEXANDRE; ERNESTO GAPASIN, Doctor, MRC Springfield, Defendants-Appellees Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 1:17-CV-883 Before SMITH, WIENER, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Plaintiff-Appellant Cecil McDonald Davis, federal prisoner # 40552-083, appeals the dismissal of his action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), complaining of a denial of medical care related to treatment for an injury to his right quadricep. He contends that the district court erred in dismissing his Eighth Amendment 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. * Case: 18-30399 Document: 00514902926 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/04/2019 No. 18-30399 claim against his treating physician, Dr. Joel Alexandre, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(b) and § 1915A. Our review is de novo. See Geiger v. Jowers, 404 F.3d 371, 373 (5th Cir. 2005). The filings show that Davis merely disagrees with the course of his medical treatment; he believes that Dr. Alexandre was negligent. See Gobert v. Caldwell, 463 F.3d 339, 346 (5th Cir. 2006). These contentions do not raise a constitutional claim. See id. Davis raises no issue with respect to the dismissal of his claims against the United States; the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP); M.D. Carvajal, Warden at USP Pollack; L. Sanders, Warden MCFP Springfield; and Ernesto Gapasin, M.D., MCFP Springfield. He has therefore waived by failing to brief any issue he might have asserted with respect to the claims against those defendants. See Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222, 224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). The judgment is AFFIRMED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.