United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
PHIL GILBERT United States District Judge.
case is before the Court on Plaintiff Michael Curtis
Reynolds' “Emergency Expedited Injunction for
Medical Malpractice Due to Unlicensed Medical
‘Practitioner' ‘Doctor' Ahmed.”
(Doc. 1). Plaintiff is an inmate at Federal Correctional
Institution Greenville (FCI Greenville). The Court construes
the filing as a motion for a temporary restraining order
(“TRO”) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65.
For the reasons stated below, the request for TRO is
DENIED without prejudice.
claim is that Doctor Fasil Ahmed, presumably a doctor at FCI
Greenville, is practicing medicine without a valid license.
(Doc. 1, p. 1). He claims that Ahmed has “caused injury
to several parties, such as Donald Packham[.]”
(Id.). He requests that an injunction issue to
prevent Ahmed from practicing and a licensed doctor be
brought in to “reevaluate” all his patients to
determine damages. (Id.).
this action has not been properly initiated. The Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure provide that “[a] civil action
is commenced by filing a complaint with the court.”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 3. In other words, “the first step in the
action is the filing of the complaint.” Id.,
Advisory Committee Notes, 1937 Adoption. No. Complaint has
been filed in this case and the instant filing cannot be
considered an adequate Complaint. While pro se
litigants are not held to the same standards as licensed
attorneys, they are not entitled to general dispensation from
the rules of procedure. See Wicker v. Illinois Dep't
of Pub. Aid, 215 F.3d 1331 (7th Cir. 2000) (citing
Jones v. Phipps, 39 F.3d 158, 163 (7th Cir. 1994)).
Additionally, a party initiating civil litigation is required
to either pay the filing fee or file a motion requesting
in forma pauperis status. Plaintiff has done
Plaintiff has failed to state any grounds for relief. A
federal prisoner who seeks relief for the misconduct of
federal agents has three options for obtaining relief in
federal court. He may bring a suit against the United States
under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) for
misconduct of federal agents that is considered tortious
under state law. Sisk v. United States, 756 F.2d
497, 500 n.4 (7th Cir. 1985) (citing 28 U.S.C. §§
1346(6), 2680). He may bring a suit against the agent for a
violation of his constitutional rights under the theory set
forth in Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics
Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Id. Or, he may
bring both types of claims in the same suit. See, e.g.,
Ting v. United States, 927 F.2d 1504, 1513 n. 10 (9th
Cir. 1991). Here, Plaintiff asserts only that Ahmed is
practicing without a license, which is neither a tort nor a
violation of Plaintiff's constitutional rights under any
recognized Bivens action. Plaintiff fails to state
how Ahmed's licensure status implicates him in any way.
to the extent Plaintiff suggests some harm may have been
inflicted on another inmate by Ahmed, Plaintiff does not have
standing pursuant to Article III of the Constitution to bring
such a claim. “When considering whether a party
satisfies the constitutional requirement of standing, the
court must determine that the plaintiff himself has suffered
some threatened or actual injury resulting from the
putatively illegal action.” Massey v. Helman,
196 F.3d 727, 739 (7th Cir. 1999) (quotations omitted). Even
if there were some cognizable claim by other inmates
Plaintiff alleges were harmed by Ahmed, Plaintiff cannot
bring the suit- he is only entitled to assert his own rights.
Id. at 739-40.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's
“Emergency Expedited Injunction for Medical Malpractice
Due to Unlicensed Medical ‘Practitioner'
‘Doctor' Ahmed.” (Doc. 1) is DENIED
without prejudice. The Court cannot screen a
Complaint or consider a motion for injunctive relief until it
receives a Complaint. If Plaintiff wishes to pursue this
action, he must file a Complaint on or before November 8,
2019. Failure to do so will result in
dismissal of this action under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 41(b). If Plaintiff still seeks a temporary
restraining order and/or preliminary injunction after filing
a Complaint, he must file a new motion.
Plaintiff must prepay his full $400.00 filing fee for this
action or file a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma
Pauperis (“IFP motion”) along with a
certified copy of his Trust Fund Statement for the 6-month
period immediately preceding the filing of this action on or
before November 8, 2019. Failure to do so
will result in dismissal of this action
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). To enable
Plaintiff to comply with this Order, the Clerk is
DIRECTED to provide Plaintiff with both a
complaint form and a blank form IFP motion.
Plaintiff is ADVISED that he is under a
continuing obligation to keep the Clerk of Court and each
opposing party informed of any change in his address; the
Court will not independently investigate his whereabouts.
This shall be done in writing and not later than 7
days after a transfer or other change in address
occurs. Failure to comply with this order will cause a delay
in the transmission of court documents and may result in
dismissal of this action for want of prosecution.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).