United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
GILBERT U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Frank Thomas, brings this action for deprivations of his
constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 that
allegedly occurred in the Madison County Jail. Plaintiff
seeks compensatory damages and injunctive relief. 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
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, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (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.
originally filed his Complaint on September 4, 2015 in Case
No. 15-cv-988. The Court dismissed that Complaint on October
5, 2015 for failure to state a claim, and directed Plaintiff
to file an amended complaint no later than November 2, 2015.
(Doc. 6). Plaintiff filed his Amended Complaint on October
21, 2015. (Doc. 10). After reviewing the Amended Complaint,
the Court determined that it contained multiple unrelated
claims, and severed those claims into four new actions: the
present case, 16-cv-896, 16-cv-897, and 16-cv-898.
after reviewing records from the Illinois Department of
Corrections, it appears that Plaintiff has been transferred
to Robinson Correctional Center as of January 8, 2016.
Although previously directed to keep the Court of his
whereabouts, Plaintiff has not filed a notice of change of
address, either in 15-988 or any of the severed cases.
Plaintiff is once again reminded of his obligation to keep
the Court informed of his whereabouts, and that a notice of
change of address must be filed individually in all of his
severed cases. Plaintiff's claims for injunctive relief
regarding certain Madison County Jail policies are now MOOT
as he is no longer subject to those policies, and will not be
careful review of the complaint and any supporting exhibits,
the Court finds it appropriate to exercise its authority
under § 1915A; this action is subject to dismissal.
to his current placement, Plaintiff was incarcerated in the
Madison County Jail. (Doc. 4, p. 1). While at the jail,
Plaintiff alleges that Bost denied him access to legal
materials and copies, and the lack of access interfered with
his ability to prepare his criminal defense along with his
appointed attorney. (Doc. 4, p. 1; Doc. 4-2, p.1). Along with
access, Bost also denied Plaintiff paper, stamps, envelops,
and free copies. (Doc. 4, p. 2, Doc. 4-2, p. 1). Hollenbeck
also refused to notarize Plaintiff's legal papers. (Doc.
4-3, p. 4). Hollenbeck also cracked jokes about the charges
against Plaintiff on July 31, 2015. (Doc. 4-3, p. 5).
Court previously divided Plaintiff's Amended Complaint in
15-988 into 8 counts. Counts 4 and 5 were severed ...