The opinion of the court was delivered by: Murphy, District Judge:
Plaintiff Antonio McDonal, an inmate in the Minnesota Correctional Facility, brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff's complaint alleges violations of his constitutional rights while Plaintiff was housed at the Robinson Correctional Center, Illinois Department of Corrections. 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).
Upon careful review of the complaint and any supporting exhibits, the Court finds it appropriate to exercise its authority under Section 1915A; this action is subject to summary dismissal.
Plaintiff states he was housed in the Illinois Department of Corrections for eighteen months. He brings this complaint against Defendant Buscher, Commissioner of Corrections, for failing to release the interest accrued on wages and money sent to Plaintiff during his incarceration at the facility.
The due process guarantees of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments come into play when a constitutionally protected liberty or property interest is at stake. Bd. of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 577 (1972). In this case, the question is whether Plaintiff has a property interest protected by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments in the interest accrued on his individual prison trust fund account. ...