United States District Court, C.D. Illinois
MERIT REVIEW ORDER
MICHAEL M. MIHM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Timothy Bell, proceeding pro se from his detention
in the Rushville Treatment and Detention Center
(“Rushville”), seeks leave to proceed in
forma pauperis on his claim against Defendant Dr.
“privilege to proceed without posting security for
costs and fees is reserved to the many truly impoverished
litigants who, within the District Court's sound
discretion, would remain without legal remedy if such
privilege were not afforded to them.” Brewster v.
North Am. Van Lines, Inc., 461 F.2d 649, 651
(7th Cir. 1972). Additionally, a court must
dismiss cases proceeding in forma pauperis “at any
time” if the action is frivolous, malicious, or fails
to state a claim, even if part of the filing fee has been
paid. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d)(2). Accordingly, this Court
grants leave to proceed in forma pauperis only if the
complaint states a federal claim.
reviewing the Complaint, the Court accepts the factual
allegations as true, liberally construing them in
Plaintiff's favor. Turley v. Rednour, 729 F.3d
645, 651 (7th Cir. 2013). However, conclusory
statements and labels are insufficient. Enough facts must be
provided to “state a claim for relief that is plausible
on its face.” Alexander v. United States, 721
F.3d 418, 422 (7th Cir. 2013) (internal quotation
alleges that Dr. Ma was deliberately indifferent to his
serious medical needs in violation of his Fourteenth
Amendment rights. Specifically, Bell claims that Dr. Ma
ignored his complaints of pain in his left wrist and that, as
a result, Bell has had to undergo surgery on his left wrist.
Bell states that he has lost strength in his left wrist and
is still in pain.
further alleges that he is now suffering pain and similar
deficiencies in his right wrist. However, Dr. Ma is ignoring
his pain and is not treating his condition. Bell has filed
this suit seeking monetary damages.
Complaint states a claim for deliberate indifference to a
serious medical condition in violation of his Fourteenth
Amendment rights. Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 135 S.Ct.
2466 (2015); Gilbert v. Rohana, 2015 WL 6442289, * 4
(S.D. Ind. Oct. 23, 2015)(finding that
“Kinglsey did not alter the legal standard for
denial of medical treatment claims brought by pretrial
detainees like Plaintiff.”).
IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED:
Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis  is GRANTED. Pursuant to the Court's
April 26, 2016 Order, no reduced filing fee will be assessed.
Pursuant to a review of the Complaint, the Court finds that
Plaintiff states a Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Claim
against Defendant for deliberate indifference to a serious
medical need. Any additional claim(s) shall not be included
in the case except at the Court's discretion on motion by
a party for good cause shown or pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 15.
case is now in the process of service. Plaintiff is advised
to wait until counsel has appeared for Defendant before
filing any motions in order to give Defendant notice and an
opportunity to respond to those motions. Motions filed before
Defendant's counsel has filed an appearance will
generally be denied as premature. Plaintiff need not submit
any evidence to the Court at this time unless otherwise
directed by the Court.
Court will attempt service on Defendant by mailing Defendant
a waiver of service. Defendant has 60 days from service to
file an Answer. If Defendant has not filed an Answer or
appeared through counsel within 60 days of the entry of this
Order, Plaintiff may file a motion requesting the status of
service. After counsel has appeared for Defendant, the Court
will enter an Order scheduling deadlines for discovery and
respect to a Defendant who no longer works at the address
provided by Plaintiff, the entity for whom that Defendant
worked while at that address shall provide to the Clerk said
Defendant's current work address, or, if not known, said
Defendant's forwarding address. This information shall be
used only for effectuating service. Documentation of
forwarding addresses shall be retained only by the Clerk and
shall not be maintained in the public docket nor disclosed by
Defendant shall file an Answer within 60 days of the date the
waiver is sent by the clerk. A motion to dismiss is not an
Answer. The Answer should include all defenses appropriate
under the Federal Rules. The Answer and subsequent pleadings
shall be to the issues and claims stated in this Order. In
general, an answer sets forth Defendant's positions. The
Court does not rule on the merits of those positions ...