CURIAM: In 2011, James Edward Camp, Texas prisoner # 1411093, filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, asserting that in 2006 the defendants had drugged him, kidnaped him, and implanted a transmitter device in him without his consent. After determining that Camp’s complaint was untimely, the district court dismissed Camp’s complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. Camp has filed a timely appeal from the district court’s ruling. Our case law is unclear as to whether we review a district court’s § 1915A dismissal de novo or for abuse of discretion. See Ruiz v. United States, 160 F.3d 273, 275 (5th Cir.1998) (de novo review); Martin v. Scott, 156 F.3d 578, 580 (5th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). We need not resolve this discrepancy, as
recognizing that a district courts dismissal of an independent action under rule 60b is reviewed for abuse of discretion holding that a  1915a dismissal as frivolous is reviewed for abuse of discretion holding that the dismissal of a frivolous action reviewed for abuse of discretion holding that denial of joinder motion is reviewed for abuse of discretion holding that the imposition of sanctions is reviewed for abuse of discretion