United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
DAVID L. SIMPSON, Plaintiff,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, TRUE, USP MARION ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY COORDINATOR, RICHARD SCHOTT, SARA REVELL, NCR ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY COORDINATOR, CENTRAL OFFICE ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY COORDINATOR, JOHN/JANE DOE 4 DIRECTOR WARDEN MCC CHICAGO, WARDEN FCI TERRE HAUTE WARDEN PIKE COUNTY JAIL, WARDEN MACON COUNTY JAIL, WARDEN SANGAMON COUNTY JAIL, and UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
PHIL GILBERT U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
David L. Simpson, an inmate in United States Penitentiary
Marion, brings this action for deprivations of his
constitutional rights pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims
Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346, 2671-2680 and Bivens v.
Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics,
403 U.S. 388 (1971). Plaintiff seeks $40, 000, 000 in
compensation. 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). Frivolousness is an
objective standard that refers to a claim that any reasonable
person would find meritless. Lee v. Clinton, 209
F.3d 1025, 1026-27 (7th Cir. 2000). 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). The claim of
entitlement to relief must cross “the line between
possibility and plausibility.” Id. at 557. At
this juncture, the factual allegations of the pro se
complaint are to be liberally construed. See Rodriguez v.
Plymouth Ambulance Serv., 577 F.3d 816, 821 (7th Cir.
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 summary
has been in federal custody since 2013. (Doc. 1-1, p. 3).
Since that time, he has been transferred between institutions
repeatedly, as part of “diesel therapy.”
Id. These institutions included county jails, where
Plaintiff was in the custody of the United States Marshals
service. (Doc. 1-1, p. 4). Plaintiff alleges that John/Jane
Doe #4, the Director of the Bureau of Prison's
(“BOP”) Designation Sentencing and Computation
Center was responsible for allowing and directing 15-20
transfers in the span of a year and a half. (Doc. 1-1, p. 2).
Plaintiff alleges that he suffered assaults by staff, staff
failure to protect him from assaults by other prisoners, and
medical negligence at several facilities. (Doc. 1-1, p. 3).
Plaintiff was subjected to multiple mental evaluations at
successive facilities, which he found duplicative. (Doc. 1-1,
p. 4). Plaintiff was kept from exhausting his administrative
remedies, in part because he was housed at certain facilities
so briefly that he did not have time to obtain grievance
forms or receive a response to grievances that he filed.
(Doc. 1-1, p. 3).
instance, Plaintiff was housed with Patrick Pride, an inmate
known to be violent, who threatened and assaulted Plaintiff.
(Doc. 1-1, p. 4). Plaintiff was assaulted multiple times,
including at least once in the presence of a correctional
officer. Id. Although the officer told Pride to
stand down, he did not physically intervene to stop the
was able to file a lawsuit that addressed incidents at Terre
Haute, MCC Chicago, and other transfers, but prison officials
then began retaliating against him for filing lawsuits.
specifically asked Warden True of Marion for the transfers to
end and the diesel therapy to cease, but his request was
alleges that Counselor Edmeister of UPS Marion refused to
adequately respond to his attempts to exhaust his
administrative remedies. (Doc. 1-1, pp. 4-5). The Regional
and Central Offices improperly concurred with Edmeister's
actions. (Doc. 1-1, p. 5).
has also named the Wardens/Sheriffs of MCC Chicago, FCI Terre
Haute, Pike County Jail, Macon County Jail, and Sangamon
County Jail as responsible for his “health, safety,
welfare, and treatment” and for failing to respond to
his complaints properly. (Doc. 1-1, pp. 2-3).
on the allegations of the Complaint, the Court finds it
convenient to divide the pro se action into 4 counts. The
parties and the Court will use these designations in all
future pleadings and orders, unless otherwise directed by a
judicial officer of this Court. At this time, none of
Plaintiff's claims survive threshold review; the
Complaint will be dismissed without prejudice.
Count 1 - John Doe #4 arranged and/or
approved of 15-20 transfers between institutions and county
jails since Plaintiff was admitted into BOP custody in 2013
in violation of Plaintiff's First, Fifth, Eighth, and
Fourteenth Amendment rights, and in violation of state law