The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gilbert, District Judge:
Plaintiff John Brady, an inmate in Shawnee Correctional Center ("Shawnee"), brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is serving a 35 year sentence for murder, and 5 years for aggravated unlawful restraint. This case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which provides:
(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). Conversely, a complaint is plausible on its face "when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009). Although the Court is obligated to accept factual allegations as true, see Smith v. Peters, 631 F.3d 418, 419 (7th Cir. 2011), some factual allegations may be so sketchy or implausible that they fail to provide sufficient notice of a plaintiff's claim. Brooks v. Ross, 578 F.3d 574, 581 (7th Cir. 2009). Additionally, Courts "should not accept as adequate abstract recitations of the elements of a cause of action or conclusory legal statements." Id. At the same time, however, the factual allegations of a pro se complaint are to be liberally construed. See Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Serv., 577 F.3d 816, 821 (7th Cir. 2009).
Upon careful review of the complaint and supporting exhibits, the Court finds it appropriate to exercise its authority under § 1915A; this action is subject to summary dismissal.
Plaintiff John Brady states in his complaint that on August 10, 2009, he visited Defendant Aldridge, the prison dentist at Shawnee, to have a diseased tooth extracted. After an unsuccessful two-hour procedure, Defendant Aldridge informed Plaintiff that the tooth was fused to his jawbone and would require oral surgery from an outside source. Defendant Aldridge left two roots from Plaintiff's tooth protruding through an open wound in his mouth. Plaintiff alleges that after the procedure he was unable to eat on the right side of his mouth because of the risk of infection, resulting in a decreased consumption of food. Plaintiff also states that he has experienced chronic aches and pains since the incident.
Plaintiff filed a grievance over the incident, which was denied by the Administrative Review Board on February 3, 2010 (Doc. 1, p. 8). Plaintiff filed this action on June 15, 2011.
Plaintiff alleges that the actions of Defendant Aldridge summarized above constituted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of his constitutional rights. Plaintiff also alleges that Defendant Shiker, the medical director of the Illinois Department of Corrections ("IDOC"), violated his right to remain ...