IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DIVISION OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION KEVIN ROBINSON PLAINTIFF v. 4:22-CV-00217-BRW ARKANSAS PAROL BOARD DEFENDANTS ORDER Plaintiff asserts that the Arkansas Parole Board incorrectly made him serve five additional months of parole.1 A district court has the authority to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to state a claim.2 “The Arkansas Parole Board is not a ‘person’ amenable to suit in a § 1983 action.”3 Additionally, “[i]t is well-settled that parole board members and parole hearing officers are entitled to absolute immunity when deciding whether to grant, deny, or revoke parole.”4 Because Plaintiff’s Complaint states no cause of action against Defendant for which relief

may be granted, this case is DISMISSED. The motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED as MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED this 16th day of March, 2022. Billy Roy Wilson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1Doc. No. 1. 2See Smith v. Boyd,

(8th Cir. 1991). 3Aaron v. Felts, No. 5:12CV00097 DPM/JTR,

, at *1 (E.D. Ark. Apr. 3, 2012), report and recommendation adopted, No. 5:12-CV-97-DPM,

(E.D. Ark. Apr. 30, 2012) (citing Deloria v. Lightenberg, No. 10–2358,

(8th Cir. Nov. 4, 2010)). 4Campbell v. Williams, No. 5:10CV00312 SWW,

, at *1 (E.D. Ark. Apr. 26, 2011). See Anton v. Getty,

, 395 (8th Cir. 1996) (explaining that “parole officials in deciding to grant, deny, or revoke parole, perform functions comparable to judges, and are, therefore, entitled to absolute immunity”) (internal quotation omitted)).