United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Herndon United States District Judge
matter is now before the Court for review of a Motion for
Reconsideration (doc. 16) and a Motion to Supplement
Reconsideration (doc. 19) filed by Plaintiff Mickey Mason. In
both motions, Plaintiff challenges the Court's decision
to dismiss all but one claim on September 21, 2017 (doc. 9).
For the reasons set forth herein, both motions (docs. 16, 19)
originally filed this action on August 15, 2017 (doc. 1).
Before the Court screened the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915A, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint (doc. 6)
on August 25, 2017. In it, he asserted various claims for
deprivations of his constitutional rights against officials
at Menard Correctional Center (“Menard”). The
Court screened the Amended Complaint on September 21, 2017,
and identified the following claims:
Count 1 - Claim against Defendants Wood,
Smolek, and Butler, based on Plaintiff's warning that the
defendants would be liable for anything that occurred in the
odd-numbered galleries of Menard's East Cell House on
February 3, 2016.
Count 2 - Eighth Amendment deliberate
indifference claim against the Orange Crush Officers and
Spiller for using excessive force against Plaintiff on April
Count 3 - Fourteenth Amendment due process
claim against Defendants Wood, Pierce, Rowold, and Butler for
failing to respond to Plaintiff's grievances in 2016-17.
Count 4 - First and/or Fourteenth Amendment
denial of access to courts claim against the Mailroom Staff
and Internal Affairs for regularly interfering with
Plaintiff's personal and legal mail in 2016-17.
Count 5 - First and/or Fourteenth Amendment
denial of access to courts claim against the Orange Crush
Officers who searched Plaintiff's cell and confiscated
his personal property, including his legal mail, documents,
and materials, on August 3, 2017.
Count 6 - Eighth Amendment deliberate
indifference claim against unnamed defendants who transferred
Plaintiff into a one-man cell with a cellmate on August 10,
Count 7 - Eighth Amendment deliberate
indifference to medical needs claim against unnamed
defendants who have denied Plaintiff access to medical
treatment since April 1, 2016.
Count 8 - Claim against Defendants for
conspiring to retaliate against Plaintiff for exercising his
(Doc. 6; Doc. 9, p. 7). The Court dismissed Counts 1, 3, 6,
7, and 8 for failure to state a claim upon which relief may
be granted (doc. 9, p. 13). The Court also determined that
the remaining claims (Counts 2, 4, and 5) were improperly
joined in the same action (doc. 9, pp. 10-12). Therefore,
pursuant to Rules 18, 20, and 21 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure and George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605
(7th Cir. 2007), the Court severed Counts 4 and 5 into two
new cases (doc. 9, pp. 10-13). Count 2 remained in this
action and survived preliminary review under § 1915A
(doc. 9, p. 15; Doc. 10).