United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 99-3270 ___________ Michael Wayne Ford, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Dora B. Schriro, Director, Missouri * Department of Corrections; George * Lombardi, Division Director, Missouri * Appeal from the United States Department of Corrections; Steve Long, * District Court for the Assistant Division Director of Missouri * Eastern District of Missouri.

Department of Corrections; Lisa Jones, * Constituent Services Officer, Missouri * Department of Corrections; Michael * Payne, Internal Affairs Officer, * Missouri Department of Corrections; * David Williams, Internal Affairs * Officer, Missouri Department of * [UNPUBLISHED] Corrections; Michael Bowersox, * Superintendent, Potosi Correctional * Center; Charles Dwyer, Assistant * Superintendent, Potosi Correctional * Center; Donna McCondichie, Assistant * Superintendent, Potosi Correctional * Center; Gary Reed, Institutional * Investigator, Potosi Correctional * Facility; Thomas King, Institutional * Investigator, Potosi Correctional * Facility; Fred Johnson, Functional Unit * Manager, Potosi Correctional Center; * Sharon Gifford, Caseworker, Potosi * Correctional Center, individually and * in their official capacities, * * Appellees. * ___________ Submitted: May 17, 2000 Filed: June 2, 2000 ___________ Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM.

Missouri inmate Michael Ford appeals from the final judgment entered in the District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri dismissing under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), before service of process, Ford’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. He also seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis, which we grant. In his suit against a number of Missouri prison officials, Ford alleged, in part, that defendants retaliated against him for disclosing that a prison employee was bringing marijuana into the prison, and reneged on a promise to impose no discipline for his participation in an investigation.

Because Ford’s complaint stated a claim, see, e.g., Cornell v. Woods, 69 F.3d 1383, 1388, 1389 (8th Cir. 1995), we reverse the judgment of the district court and remand for further proceedings. We deny Ford’s request for appointment of counsel, without prejudice to his right to file another such motion in the district court.

-2- A true copy.

Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-3-