The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Phil Gilbert United States District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GILBERT District Judge:
Plaintiff, an inmate currently in the Menard Correctional Center, filed the instant action while he was housed in the Pinckneyville Correctional Center. Plaintiff brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which provides, in pertinent part:
(a) Screening.-- The court shall review, before docketing, if feasible or, in any event, as soon as practicable after docketing, a complaint in a civil action in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.
(b) Grounds for Dismissal.-- On review, the court shall identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint--
(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or
(2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.
An action or claim is frivolous if "it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). An action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted if it does not plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007).
Plaintiff's original complaint, a portion of which is reviewed below, was filed on August 31, 2010, under Case Number 10-cv-689. That complaint contained many unrelated claims brought against a number of Defendants. On March 1, 2011, this Court informed Plaintiff that it would sever the unrelated claims in his complaint into new suits unless he dismissed those claims. When Plaintiff failed to dismiss the claims, the Court severed them, which resulted in the instant action being opened before the Court on April 20, 2011. See Doc. 1.
Upon careful review of the complaint and any supporting exhibits, the Court finds that some of the claims in this complaint are subject to dismissal.
The following version of the facts of this case is gleaned from Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 3). Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Taylor came to Plaintiff's cell and made threats. These threats involved Plaintiff's sexual orientation and religion. Defendant Taylor allegedly said to Plaintiff, "Hi you faggett Bitch [sic]," "[Taylor] should come in [Plaintiff's] cell and beat [Plaintiff] to death for being gay," and "should have killed all us Jews when the [sic] had the chance to."
Defendant Taylor then refused to bring Plaintiff lunch, and continued to deny Plaintiff meals for two days while Plaintiff was in segregation. During that time, Plaintiff asked Defendant Taylor to provide him ...