United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HERNDON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
John Allen, an inmate currently housed at Pinckneyville
Correctional Center (“Pinckneyville”), filed this
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims
that Correctional Officer Gilley subjected him to sexual
harassment, in violation of his Eighth Amendment rights.
case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of the
Complaint (Doc. 11) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which
(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.
25, 2017, Plaintiff was exiting his wing to attend yard.
(Doc. 11, p. 5). When Plaintiff entered the “core,
” Correctional Officer Gilley stopped him and asked,
“What the fuck are you looking at?” Correctional
Officer Gilley then said, “either want to fuck me or
fight me, which is it?” Id. Plaintiff was
denied access to the yard and Correctional Officer Gilley
escorted Plaintiff back to his cell. Id.
Correctional Officer Gilley then said, “We're
either gonna fuck or you gonna buy me a new truck.”
Id. Plaintiff claims that Officer Gilley has
sexually harassed him on multiple occasions and that his
encounters with Officer Gilley are causing mental health
issues. Id. Plaintiff claims that he has filed
multiple complaints and grievances pertaining to Officer
Gilley's conduct, to no avail.
Review Under § 1915(A)
on the allegations of the Complaint, the Court finds it
convenient to divide the pro se action into a single
count. The parties and the Court will use this designation in
all future pleadings and orders, unless otherwise directed by
a judicial officer of this Court. The designation of this
count does not constitute an opinion regarding its merit.
1 - Eighth Amendment claim against C/O Gilley for
sexually harassing Plaintiff on June 25, 2017, and at other
alleges that Officer Gilley has repeatedly subjected him to
sexual harassment. Specifically, on June 25, 2017, Officer
Gilley made threatening comments about engaging in sexual
acts with Plaintiff. Plaintiff claims that he is ...