
USCA1 Opinion

	




          April 23, 1996                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 96-1176                            MAXIMILIANO AMPARO CONCEPCION,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                            ADMINISTRACION DE CORRECCION,                                Defendants, Appellees.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO                    [Hon. Hector M. Laffitte, U.S. District Judge]                                              ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                           Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges.                                            ______________                                 ____________________            Maximiliano Amparo Concepcion on brief pro se.            _____________________________                                 ____________________                                 ____________________                      Per Curiam.  We agree with  the district court that                      __________            plaintiff's allegations with respect to his  dental treatment            were  insufficient to  state a  constitutional claim,  and we            affirm  the   dismissal  of  that  claim.     Plaintiff  also            contended, however, that the correctional facility has no law            library and outlined a denial of access to courts claim.  The            district  court did not address  this claim when it dismissed            plaintiff's action.  We conclude that plaintiff stated enough            to survive a  sua sponte  dismissal of the  access to  courts            claim  and therefore  vacate  the judgment  of dismissal  and            remand  for further  consideration  of the  access to  courts            claim.                 Vacated and remanded.                 ____________________                                         -2-
