United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Springfield Division
MERIT REVIEW OPINION
RICHARD MILLS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Jamal Shehadeh, who is in the custody of the Bureau of
Prisons, filed a complaint in the Circuit Court for the 4th
Judicial Circuit, Christian County, Illinois, Case Number
2018-MR-175. He asserts claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983. The Defendants removed the case to this Court.
Defendants request that the Court screen the
Plaintiff’s complaint for merit. Because the Plaintiff
was in BOP’s custody when he filed his complaint, this
action is subject to the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s
(PLRA) mandatory screening requirement whether or not it was
filed originally in federal court. See U.S.C. §
1915A requires the Court to identify cognizable claims stated
by the complaint or dismiss claims that are not cognizable.
In reviewing the complaint, the Court accepts the factual
allegations as true, liberally construing them in the
Plaintiff’s favor. See Turley v. Rednour, 729
F.3d 645, 649 (7th Cir. 2013). However, conclusory statements
and labels are insufficient. “[A] complaint must
contain facts that are sufficient, when accepted as true, to
‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face.’” Alexander v. United States, 721
F.3d 418, 422 (7th Cir. 2013) (quoted citation omitted).
a guilty plea to the manufacture of methamphetamine, the
Plaintiff was sentenced to 54 months in the custody of the
Bureau of Prisons, followed by a 6-year term of supervised
release. The Petitioner is incarcerated at McKean FCI in
Lewis Run, Pennsylvania, and is scheduled to be released on
September 1, 2020.
Defendants named by the Plaintiff are Macon County, former
Macon County Sheriff Thomas Schneider and Sergeant Matthew
Reynolds; in addition to Sangamon County, former Sangamon
County Sheriff Wes Barr and Brett Jackson of the United
States Marshals Service (USMS).
complaint, the Plaintiff alleges that on July 14, 2016,
Sangamon County officials requested that the United States
Marshals Service transfer the Plaintiff out of Sangamon
County Jail. The Plaintiff alleges that USMS requested that
Macon County, Schneider and Reynolds take custody of the
Plaintiff. On July 14, 2016, the Plaintiff was transferred to
the Macon County Jail.
Plaintiff alleges the transfer occurred in response to and in
retaliation for the Plaintiff’s exercise of his right
to petition the government for redress of grievances.
previous Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the
Plaintiff alleged that multiple county jails and the United
States Marshals Service retaliated by transferring him to
another facility for exercising protected First Amendment
conduct, such as filing grievances and pursuing litigation.
See Shehadeh v. Downey, et al., No.
18-3165-cv-RM-TSH, See Doc. No. 1-1. The Plaintiff alleged
there many of the same Defendants (and others not named in
this suit) violated his constitutional rights and rights
under Illinois law. That complaint includes allegations
related to the July 14 2016 transfer. In a Merit Review
Opinion of October 22, 2018, the Court dismissed Case Number
18-3165 for failure to state a claim, finding that
Plaintiff’s claims there were part of the same
operative facts as previous lawsuits and were thus barred by
Court concludes that each of the Plaintiff’s claims are
barred by res judicata. Res judicata, or
claim preclusion, prohibits a party from relitigating matters
that were fully litigated, or could have been fully
litigated, in a previously adjudicated cause of action.
Groesch v. City of Springfield, Ill., 635 F.3d 1020,
1029 (7th Cir. 2011). In Illinois, res judicata
applies when: (1) there is a final judgment in the first
suit; (2) there is identity of the causes of action based on
the operative facts; and (3) there is an identity of parties
or parties that are in privity with one another. See
Czarniecki v. City of Chicago, 633 F.3d 545, 548 (7th
lawsuit is essentially the same as Case Number 18-3165, which
was the same as two previous lawsuits, including Shehadeh
v. Downey, et al., Kankakee Co. Case. No. 16 L 107 (Feb.
28, 2017); Shehadeh v. Hervas, Condon, and Bersani, P.C.,
et al., Kankakee Co. No. 17 L 20 (July 28, 2017), which
have been dismissed. The Plaintiff could have and did assert
the same claims in at least three previous lawsuits.
Court finds that all of those claims were part of the same
operative facts and are barred by res judicata.
Accordingly, the case will be dismissed for failure to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted.
the Plaintiff has previously filed the same action against
these Defendants, this case is counted as a strike pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
The Plaintiff is precluded from filing further civil
litigation in federal court without prepaying all required
fees or meeting the imminent danger standard of §
1915(g). See Lewis v. Sullivan, 279 F.3d 526, 527
(7th Cir. 2002).
this case is Dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ...