Dist. Ct. erred in entering judgment in favor of defendant-prison in plaintiff-prisoner’s Federal Tort Claim Act claim alleging that defendant’s negligence resulted in plaintiff contracting MRSA infection. While Dist. Ct. could properly find that plaintiff had failed to show that he had contracted MRSA from fellow inmate or from procedures used by defendant in laundry area, where plaintiff and inmate worked, defendant was entitled to new trial, since Dist. Ct. had improperly limited plaintiff’s lawsuit to theory that plaintiff had contracted MRSA from said inmate, when fair reading of plaintiff’s pro se complaint indicated that plaintiff had alleged broader theory that defendant was negligent in failing to adhere to its MRSA-containment policies at time of plaintiff’s infection.