United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
PHIL GILBERT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Johnny Selders, an inmate in Lincoln Correctional Center,
brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for
deprivations of his constitutional rights that allegedly
occurred at Centralia Correctional Center
(“Centralia”). In his Complaint, Plaintiff claims
the defendants have been deliberately indifferent to his
serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
(Doc. 1). This case is now before the Court for a preliminary
review of the 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.
careful review of the Complaint and any supporting exhibits,
the Court finds it appropriate to allow this case to proceed
past the threshold stage.
Complaint (Doc. 1), Plaintiff makes the following
allegations: on May 4, 2016, while Plaintiff was incarcerated
at Centralia, he injured his left knee playing basketball.
(Doc. 1, p. 5). He was admitted to the health care unit
(“HCU”) and remained there from May 4, 2016 to
May 18, 2016. Id. During this time, his left leg
would not bend, he could not walk, his left knee was swollen,
and he was in excruciating pain. Id. He was seen by
Defendants Santos, Shah, Garcia, and Butalid. Id. On
May 7, 2016, X-rays were taken of Plaintiff's left knee.
Id. Santos, Shah, Garcia, and Butalid all told him
on several occasions that the X-rays were normal and that he
had only suffered a sprain. Id.
was discharged from the HCU by Santos on May 18, 2016,
despite his constant complaints and concerns regarding the
condition of his knee. Id. Plaintiff was transferred
to Lincoln Correctional Center on September 28, 2016, where
he was told that he may have suffered a meniscal injury to
his left knee. Id. Plaintiff was taken to Abraham
Lincoln Memorial Hospital on December 21, 2016 for a physical
therapy evaluation, where he was diagnosed with chronic left
knee pain and muscle atrophy with decreased range of motion.
Id. Plaintiff also received an MRI, which showed a
longitudinal tear in Plaintiff's lateral meniscus and a
chronic rupture of his anterior cruciate ligament
quality of life had significantly changed since his injury,
due in part, he believes, to Santos, Shah, Garcia, and
Butalid's indifference to his serious medical needs.
Id. Plaintiff seeks to have his medical needs
addressed and to be granted lifetime physical therapy for his
left leg. (Doc. 1, p. 6). He also seeks monetary damages from
the defendants. Id.
on the allegations of the Complaint, the Court finds it
convenient to designate a single count in this pro
se action. 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