United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
DEREK I. ALLMON, #12579-076, Plaintiff,
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
PHIL GILBERT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Derek Allmon, a federal inmate who is currently confined in
the United States Medical Center for Federal Prisoners
located in Springfield, Missouri, brings this action against
the United States pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act
(“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346, 2671-2680.
(Doc. 1). The Complaint is now before the Court for review
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
1915A requires the Court to screen prisoner Complaints and
filter out non-meritorious claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).
Any portion of the Complaint that is legally frivolous or
malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or requests
money damages from an immune defendant must be dismissed. 28
U.S.C. § 1915A(b). At this juncture, the factual
allegations are liberally construed. Rodriguez v.
Plymouth Ambulance Serv., 577 F.3d 816, 821 (7th Cir.
sets forth no allegations in the Complaint. (Doc. 1, pp.
1-5). He includes no request for relief. He does not describe
his claim in basic terms. (Id.). The Complaint
consists of a one-page handwritten “Notice to Commence
28 U.S.C. § 1346 Civil Action and Request for Legal
Counsel.” (Id. at p. 1). Along with the
handwritten request, he includes two denials of a federal
tort claim from the Federal Bureau of Prisons - North Central
Regional Office dated April 5, 2019, and August 15, 2019.
(Id. at pp. 2-3).
Complaint does not survive screening. Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 8(a)(2) requires the Complaint to contain “a
short and plain statement of the claim showing that the
pleader is entitled to relief, ” in order to
‘give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim
is and the grounds upon which it rests.'” Bell
Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)
(quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)).
Plaintiff's exhibits do not replace his statement of
claim. Exhibits may support or even clarify claims, but they
often include extraneous information. Absent a statement of
claim, the Court cannot determine which events, grievances,
or misconduct give rise to the claims in this case.
Court's standard complaint form contains instructions for
preparing a proper statement of claim. According to them,
Plaintiff must state “as briefly as possible, when,
where, how, and by whom [he] feel[s] [his] constitutional
rights were violated.” In other words, Plaintiff must
simply and concisely describe the basis for his FTCA claim(s)
against the United States.
also include a request for relief. See Fed. R. Civ.
P. 8(a)(3). Rule 8(a)(3) requires a plaintiff to include a
“demand for the relief sought, ” and this
“may include relief in the alternative or different
types of relief.” Id. Plaintiff's
Complaint contains no such request.
failure to provide the most basic information about his
claim(s) against the United States is fatal to the Complaint.
The Complaint shall be dismissed. However, Plaintiff shall
have an opportunity to file a First Amended Complaint, if he
wishes to proceed any further with his claim(s) in this case.
If he chooses to do so, Plaintiff is bound by the deadline
and instructions for filing a First Amended Complaint set
forth in the below disposition.
Motions for Recruitment of Counsel (Docs. 2 and 4) are
DENIED without prejudice. A district court
faced with a request for counsel must consider whether the
plaintiff is unable to afford counsel and has made reasonable
efforts to obtain counsel on his own before seeking the
Court's assistance. If so, the Court must determine
whether the plaintiff appears competent to litigate the case
without counsel. Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654
(7th Cir. 2007).
has not established that he is unable to afford counsel.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). The Court denied
his Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis,
and he paid the filing fee in full on November 6, 2019. (Doc.
7). Plaintiff does not assert that he is unable to afford
counsel. He also describes no efforts to locate counsel on
his own. Further, despite the fact that he is currently
housed in segregation, “nearly” blind, and cannot
walk, Plaintiff has neither claimed nor demonstrated that he
is unable to read, write, comprehend, or prosecute his claims
in this action. At this stage, he has not satisfied any of
the requirements necessary to obtain recruited counsel.
Accordingly, both motions (Docs. 2 and 4) are denied.
Plaintiff may renew this request by filing a new motion at
any time he deems it necessary to do so during the pending