United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
ANGELITO C. MERCADO, Plaintiff,
BARTHOLOMEW COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, MATT MYERS, Defendants.
ENTRY DISMISSING COMPLAINT AND DIRECTING FURTHER
WALTON PRATT, JUDGE.
plaintiff shall have through March 8, 2017,
in which to either pay the $400.00 filing fee for this action
or demonstrate that he lacks the financial ability to do so.
asserts in his complaint that while he has been incarcerated
at the Bartholomew County Jail on October 31, 2016, staff
failed to provide medical treatment in violation of the
Eighth Amendment for drugs he accidentally ingested.
the plaintiff is a “prisoner” as defined by 28
U.S.C. § 1915(h), a pre-trial detainee at the
Bartholomew County Jail, the complaint is subject to the
screening requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). Pursuant
to this statute, “[a] complaint is subject to dismissal
for failure to state a claim if the allegations, taken as
true, show that plaintiff is not entitled to relief.”
Jones v. Bock, 127 S.Ct. 910, 921 (2007). To survive
a motion to dismiss, the complaint “must contain
sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim
to relief that is plausible on its face. . . . A claim has
facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content
that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that
the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.”
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009)
(quotations omitted). Pro se complaints such as that filed by
the plaintiff, are construed liberally and held to a less
stringent standard than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.
Obriecht v. Raemisch, 517 F.3d 489, 491 n.2 (7th
on this screening, the complaint must be
dismissed. Mercado names as defendants the
Bartholomew County Sheriff's Department and Sherriff
Myers. But he fails to state a claim against either of these
defendants. First, he does not assert that the alleged
violations of his rights were the result of a widespread
policy of practice, which is required to hold the
Sheriff's Department liable. See Rodriguez v.
Plymouth Ambulance Serv., 577 F.3d 816 (7th Cir. 2009)
(a municipal entity is not vicariously liable under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 for the alleged misdeeds of its employees, but
only if the injury alleged is the result of a policy or
practice). In addition, Mercado does not allege that Sheriff
Myers personally participated in the alleged acts. 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, 129
S.Ct. at 1948.
foregoing reasons, the complaint is
dismissed. The dismissal of the complaint
will not lead to the dismissal of the action at present.
Instead, the plaintiff shall have through March 8
2017, in which to file an amended complaint.
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.