UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
March 27, 2006
ANTONIO G. REYES, PLAINTIFF,
CHRISTOPHER SIDWELL, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Harold A. Baker United States District Judge
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER #1
This case is before the court for consideration of all pending matters.
The plaintiff, on July 11, 2005, filed an amended complaint naming only Correctional Officer Christopher Sidwell as a defendant. That action mooted the then pending motions at d/e 13, and 16. The defendant moved to dismiss the amended complaint at d/e 26.
After examination of the record in this case, and specifically the supplemental matters attached to the plaintiff's complaint, the court concludes that the plaintiff has not alleged a viable claim of retaliation by the defendant for the grievances plaintiff filed about the food service. The time of filing the grievances is subsequent to the alleged food service violations making retaliation for those grievances impossible. The claim about the placement of the bible as a First Amendment violation is equally without merit. There is no liberty interest created by department property regulations in where you can store your bible. See, Joihner v. McEvers, 898 F.2d 569 passim (7th Cir.1990).
The only possible viable claim is for retaliation by Sidwell by writing false disciplinary tickets. That remains an issue in the case. See, DeWalt v. Carter, 224 F.3d 607 passim (7th Cir. 2000).
Accordingly, the defendant's motion to dismiss, d/e 26, is granted in part and denied in part. The plaintiff may proceed on his claim of retaliation against Sidell when he allegedly wrote a false disciplinary tickets in response to the plaintiff filing grievances. This case is set for Rule 16 proceedings by video conference on May 2, 2006 at 9:45 a.m. The clerk is directed to issue the appropriate writs to secure the participation of the plaintiff and defense counsel.
Enter this 27th day of March, 2006.
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.