The opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-20538
Conference Calendar
ALFRONZO BROWN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
S. THOMPSON, Sgt.,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. CA-H-95-5386
- - - - - - - - - -
August 22, 1996
Before KING, DUHÉ, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Alfronzo Brown (#627935) appeals the dismissal of his civil
rights complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d), now
§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Brown contends that appellee deprived him of
his liberty by writing a false disciplinary report in retaliation
against him for using the prison’s grievance procedures.
We have reviewed the record and Brown’s brief and find no
reversible error in the reasoning set forth by the district
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 96-20538
- 2 -
court. Brown v. Thompson, No. CA-H-95-5386 (S.D. Tex. May 17,
1996). Brown has failed to produce direct evidence of motivation
or allege a chronology of events from which retaliation may
plausibly be inferred. Woods v. Smith, 60 F.3d 1161, 1165 (5th
Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 800 (1996). The discipline
imposed upon Brown, i.e.., loss of status, limited commissary
privileges, and the transfer to another facility, did not
infringe on a protected liberty interest that would implicate due
process concerns. Sandin v. Conner, 115 S. Ct. 2293, 2300-01
(1995). Further, we find that Brown’s appeal is frivolous, and
accordingly, we DISMISS it pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
We caution Brown that any additional frivolous appeals filed
by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid
sanctions, Brown is further cautioned to review any pending
appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are
frivolous.
APPEAL DISMISSED. SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.