United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
NATHAN M. SILL, # B83157, Plaintiff,
JILL MOORE, and JOHN DOE, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
PHIL GILBERT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
brings this pro se civil rights action pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is presently incarcerated at
Menard Correctional Center. Plaintiff brings claims
pertaining to his arrest and subsequent detention at the
Saline County Jail (“Jail”). In connection with
his claims, Plaintiff names Jill Moore (Medical Supervisor,
Jail) and John Doe (Physician, Jail).
case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of the
First Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A,
(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.
January 24, 2017, Plaintiff was arrested and detained at the
Jail. (Doc. 1, p. 5). Prior to being arrested, Plaintiff had
been prescribed medication “that worked for
[him].” Id. Plaintiff asked “the medical
staff (Jill Moore)” if he could receive the same
medication. Id. Apparently, Moore declined to
provide Plaintiff with unspecified “mental
illness” medication. Id. However, Plaintiff
did receive Lithium,  Cogentin,  and Gabapentin. Id.
Plaintiff “talked to them” but “they still
said no.” Id. Plaintiff also wrote to
“the CPT” but did not receive a response.
on the allegations of the Complaint, the Court has divided
the pro se action into the following 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. These designations do not
constitute an opinion as to merit. Any other claim that is
mentioned in the Complaint but not addressed in this Order
should be considered dismissed without prejudice under the
Twombly pleading standard.
Count 1: Inadequate medical care claim
against Moore and John Doe for declining to provide