United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Terre Haute Division
ENTRY GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS,
DISCUSSING COMPLAINT, AND DIRECTING FURTHER
J. McKINNEY, JUDGE.
Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis
Hunt's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [dkt
2] is granted. No assessment of an initial
partial filing fee is feasible at this time.
Screening of the Complaint
complaint is now subject to the screening requirement of 28
U.S.C. § 1915A(b). This statute directs that the court
dismiss a complaint or any claim within a complaint which
“(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted; or (2) seeks monetary
relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief.” Id. To satisfy the notice-pleading
standard of Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a
complaint must provide a “short and plain statement of
the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,
” which is sufficient to provide the defendant with
“fair notice” of the claim and its basis.
Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (per
curiam) (citing Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S.
544, 555 (2007) and quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2)). The
purpose of this requirement is “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)(citing Conley v. Gibson, 355
U.S. 41, 47 (1957)); see also Wade v. Hopper, 993
F.2d 1246, 1249 (7th Cir. 1993)(noting that the main purpose
of Rule 8 is rooted in fair notice: a complaint “must
be presented with intelligibility sufficient for a court or
opposing party to understand whether a valid claim is alleged
and if so what it is.”) (quotation omitted)). The
complaint “must actually suggest that the plaintiff has
a right to relief, by providing allegations that raise a
right to relief above the speculative level.” Windy
City Metal Fabricators & Supply, Inc. v. CIT Tech. Fin.
Servs., 536 F.3d 663, 668 (7th Cir. 2008) (quoting
Tamayo v. Blagojevich, 526 F.3d 1074, 1084 (7th Cir.
on the above screening, the complaint must be
dismissed. Hunt names as defendants
Putnamville Correctional Facility, Putnamville Dental, and
Putnamville Medical. To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. §
1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right
secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and
must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a
person acting under color of state law. West v.
Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). The correctional
facility is not a “person” subject to suit
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Similarly, the claims
against Putnamville Dental and Putnamville Medical must be
dismissed because a group of people is not a
“person” subject to suit under Section 1983.
Further, a defendant can only be liable for the actions or
omissions in which he personally participated. Sanville
v. McCaughtry, 266 F.3d 724, 734 (7th Cir. 2001).
“Because vicarious liability is inapplicable to . . .
§ 1983 suits, a plaintiff must plead that each
Government-official defendant, through the official's own
individual actions, has violated the Constitution.”
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1948 (2009).
Opportunity to File an Amended Complaint
dismissal of the complaint will not in this instance lead to
the dismissal of the action at present. Instead, the
plaintiff shall have through October 7,
2016, in which to file an amended
filing an amended complaint, the plaintiff shall conform to
the following guidelines: (a) the amended complaint shall
comply with the requirement of Rule 8(a)(2) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that pleadings contain
“a short and plain statement of the claim showing that
the pleader is entitled to relief. . . ., ” which is
sufficient to provide the defendant with “fair
notice” of the claim and its basis. Erickson v.
Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (per curiam) (citing
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)
and quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2)); (b) the amended complaint
must include a demand for the relief sought; (c) the amended
complaint must identify what legal injury they claim to have
suffered and what persons are responsible for each such legal
injury; and (d) the amended complaint must include the case
number referenced in the caption of this Entry. The plaintiff
is further notified that “[u]nrelated claims against
different defendants belong in different suits.”
George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007).
organizing his complaint, the plaintiff may benefit from
utilizing the Court's complaint form. The clerk
is directed to include a copy of the prisoner civil
rights complaint form along with the plaintiffs copy of this
amended complaint is filed as directed above, it will be
screened. If no amended complaint is filed, this action will
be dismissed for the reasons set forth above.