United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
H. LEFKOW, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 
Phonakone Sangathit, an inmate of the Illinois Department of
Corrections (“IDOC”) currently incarcerated at
Menard Correctional Center (“Menard”), brings
this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983
for alleged deprivations of his constitutional rights.
Sangathit alleges defendants subjected him to cruel and
unusual punishment in retaliation for filing a grievance
following the restriction of his visitation rights. He
requests money damages and injunctive relief.
complaint is now before the court for preliminary review
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Under Section 1915A, the
court is required to screen prisoner complaints to filter out
non-meritorious claims. See 28 U.S.C. §
1915A(a). Any portion of a complaint that is legally
frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, or asks for money damages from a
defendant who by law is immune from such relief must be
dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). At this juncture, the
factual allegations of the pro se complaint are to
be liberally construed. Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance
Serv., 577 F.3d 816, 821 (7th Cir. 2009).
makes the following allegations in the complaint (Dkt. 1):
Sangathit was leaving the recreation yard when he was grabbed
from the line by Internal Affairs Officers Resse, Kramer,
McCarthy, and Gee. They handcuffed him and took him to the
West House shower where they strip searched him and told him
to bend over and spread his buttocks, while making derogatory
sexual, homosexual, and racial comments. When Sangathit asked
why this was being done to him, McCarthy said that “he
had pissed off the wrong people, ” and that he will now
“think twice about who you write a grievance on.”
(Id. at 7.) Sangathit continued to be handcuffed for
over two hours while his cell was searched.
Kramer, McCarthy, and Gee then took Sangathit to the health
care unit where he was placed in a suicide/strip cell with no
running water or working toilet. The cell had not been
cleaned; there was food, feces, vomit, and blood on the floor
and walls; and the lights remained on twenty-four hours a
day. He asked again why he was being placed under
investigation and on watch and he was told “because
they can do it.” (Id. at 8.) After he
submitted to a drug test and gave a urine sample, Resse,
Kramer, McCarthy, and Gee held him down and ordered medical
staff John Doe #1 to conduct a rectal cavity search against
Sangathit's will. John Doe #1 complied and searched
Sangathit's rectal cavity, following Menard medical
director Dr. Siddiqui and Wexford's unwritten policy of
following the orders of non-medical personnel regarding
medical care and treatment of inmates. Sangathit announced
several times that he did not consent to the search.
Following the search, he had rectal bleeding and asked to be
examined by a doctor but was denied. He was left handcuffed
again for another two hours. John Doe #2 told Sangathit that
he was supposed to uncuff Sangathit but was going to leave
him cuffed so that he understood who is in charge.
was kept in the freezing cold suicide cell from Friday until
Monday. During that time, he asked for the lights to be
turned off so that he could sleep but was told that on Major
Ratake and Emaldi's orders the lights were to be left on
because of something that he had done to the warden. During
this time, because there was not a working toilet in the
cell, he was forced to urinate in a jar and defecate in a
bucket, unable to wash his hands. He was denied clean
clothes, toilet paper, soap, tooth brush, and other hygiene
items. From being in the dirty cell, he developed a rash on
his back, buttocks, and legs. He was given hydrocortisone
cream to treat the rash, but when he tried to see a doctor
and receive more cream, he was not called to sick call,
leaving the rash untreated.
Monday, Sangathit was taken to have his lower body x-rayed,
but the results showed there was no object hidden internally.
He was written a ticket and placed under investigation.
Sangathit was then sent to segregation where he was held in
another dirty cell with a wet mattress that smelled of urine.
He informed defendants about his cell conditions and asked
for cleaning supplies and a different mattress but was
claims that the unconstitutional treatment was done in
retaliation for a grievance he wrote about Assistant Warden
of Operations Jones who, without reason, had terminated his
visitation rights. Sangathit also states that he later
discovered that John Doe #3 claimed that he witnessed
Sangathit putting something in his rectum.
on the allegations in the Complaint, the court designates the
Count 1: Eighth Amendment claim against
Resse, Kramer, McCarthy, Gee, and John Doe #2 for using
excessive force in the process of forcing Sangathit to submit
to an anal cavity search and keeping him handcuffed for long
periods of time.
Count 2: Eighth Amendment claim against
Resse, Kramer, McCarthy, Gee, and John Doe #1 for cruel and
unusual punishment by subjecting Sangathit to a strip search
and rectal cavity search.
Count 3: Fourth Amendment claim against
Resse, Kramer, McCarthy, Gee, and John Doe #1 for conducting
an unreasonable rectal cavity search.
Count 4: Eighth Amendment claim against John
Doe #2 for failing to intervene and protect Sangathit from
excessive force and the rectal cavity search.
Count 5: Eighth Amendment claim of
deliberate indifference to a serious medical need against
John Doe #2 for denying Sangathit medical treatment following
the rectal cavity search.
Count 6: Eighth Amendment claim of
unconstitutional conditions of confinement against Resse,
Kramer, McCarthy, Gee, Ratake, Emaldi, and Lawrence for
keeping Sangathit in the filthy cell in the health care unit
with no running water or hygiene products and the lights on
twenty-four hours a day for four days.
Count 7: First Amendment claim against
Resse, Kramer, McCarthy, Gee, John Doe #2, John Doe #3,
Ratake, and Emaldi for retaliating against Sangathit for
filing a grievance against Assistant Warden Jones.
Count 8: Eighth Amendment claim of
deliberate indifference against Wexford staff for failing to
treat Sangathit's rash.
Count 9: Eighth Amendment claim of cruel and
unusual punishment against Wexford and Dr. Siddiqui for
implementing an unwritten policy to follow the orders of
non-medical staff regarding medical care.
Count 10: Intentional infliction of
emotional distress claim in violation of Illinois state law
against Resse, Gee, Kramer, McCarthy, Ratake, and Emaldi.
Count 11: Fourteenth Amendment due process
claim against Lawrence, Jeffreys, and Wexford for the
mishandling of Sangathit's grievance against Assistant
Warden Jones and contributing to a culture where there are no
consequences for the constitutional violations conducted by
Count 12: Fourteenth Amendment due process
claim against John Doe #4, Lawrence, and Jeffreys for the
mishandling of and failure to investigate Sangathit's
grievance against Assistant Warden Jones and the corrections
officers who retaliated against him.
Count 13: First Amendment right to freedom
of association and/or Fourteenth Amendment right to due
process claim against Jones and Lawrence for denying
Sangathit his visitation rights.
Count 14: Eighth Amendment claim of
unconstitutional conditions of confinement against defendants
for placing Sangathit in a filthy segregation cell with no
Count 15: Fourteenth Amendment claim for the
issuance of a false disciplinary ticket.
parties shall use these designations in all future pleadings
and orders, unless otherwise directed by a judicial officer
of this court. Any claim that is mentioned in the complaint
but not addressed in this Order is considered dismissed
without prejudice as inadequately pleaded under