United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
M. YANDLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Eddie Griffin, a former inmate of Vienna Correctional Center
(“Vienna”), brings this action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged deprivations of his
constitutional rights. Specifically, Plaintiff claims he was
raped repeatedly while he was incarcerated at Vienna. (Doc.
1). This case is now before the Court for a preliminary
review of the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2), which provides:
Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that
may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any
time if the court determines that -
(A) the allegation of poverty is untrue; or
(B) the action or appeal -
(i) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted;
(iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune
from such relief.
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 that the Complaint does not survive threshold
makes the following allegation in the Complaint (Doc. 1):
every day at Vienna, up to four times per day, when Plaintiff
went to sleep, “they would let [FBI Agent Rochelle
Fleming] come in [where Plaintiff] was sleeping and rape
[him] at will.” (Doc. 1, p. 4). Plaintiff demands
monetary damages from the defendants.
to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, plaintiffs are required
to associate specific defendants with specific claims, so
that defendants are put on notice of the claims brought
against them and so they can properly answer the Complaint.
See Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,
555 (2007); Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). Merely invoking the name of
a potential defendant is not sufficient to state a claim
against that individual. See Collins v. Kibort, 143
F.3d 331, 334 (7th Cir. 1998). Moreover, vague references to
a group or list of defendants, without specific allegations
tying the individual defendants to the alleged
unconstitutional conduct, do not raise a genuine issue of
material fact with respect to those defendants. See Alejo
v. Heller, 328 F.3d 930, 936 (7th Cir. 2003) ...