United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT AND DIRECTING FILING OF
WALTON PRATT, JUDGE
Izaiha Limp, an inmate at Pendleton Correctional Facility,
brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging
that another inmate assaulted him with bodily fluids. Because
the plaintiff is a “prisoner” as defined by 28
U.S.C. § 1915A(c), this Court has an obligation under 28
U.S.C. § 1915A(b) to screen his complaint before service
on the defendants.
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), the Court must dismiss the
complaint if it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a
claim for relief, or seeks monetary relief against a
defendant who is immune from such relief. In determining
whether the complaint states a claim, the Court applies the
same standard as when addressing a motion to dismiss under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). See Cesal v.
Moats, 851 F.3d 714, 720 (7th Cir. 2017). To survive
[the] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to state a claim for 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, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). 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. Perez v. Fenoglio, 792
F.3d 768, 776 (7th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation omitted).
contends that, in November of 2018, while he was confined at
the Marion County Jail, another inmate assaulted him with
bodily fluids and he was not permitted to shower. He sues the
Marion County Sheriff's Office and Johnson County
Sheriff's Office. But governmental entities cannot be
held liable for the unconstitutional acts of their employees
unless those acts were carried out pursuant to an official
custom or policy. Grieveson v. Anderson, 538 F.3d
763, 771 (7th Cir. 2008) (citing Pourghoraishi v. Flying
J, Inc., 449 F.3d 751, 765 (7th Cir. 2006); Monell
v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978)).
Limp has made no allegation of a custom or policy against
either the Marion County Sheriff's Office or the Johnson
County Sheriff's Office. Limp has not otherwise named any
individual who was allegedly personally responsible for the
acts at issue. “Individual liability under §
1983… requires personal involvement in the alleged
constitutional deprivation.” Colbert v. City of
Chicago, 851 F.3d 649, 657 (7th Cir. 2017) (internal
quotation omitted) (citing Wolf-Lillie v. Sonquist,
699 F.2d 864, 869 (7th Cir. 1983).
the Court has been unable to identify a viable claim for
relief against any defendant, the complaint is subject to
Opportunity to Amend
dismissal of the complaint will not in this instance lead to
the dismissal of the action at present. Instead, the
plaintiff shall have through April 19, 2019, to file
an amended complaint. See Tate v. SCR Med.
Transp., 809 F.3d 343, 346 (7th Cir. 2015)
(“We've often said that before dismissing a case
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) a judge should give
the litigant, especially a pro se litigant, an opportunity to
amend his complaint.”).
amended complaint must (a) contain a short and plain
statement of the claim showing that the plaintiff is entitled
to relief, which is sufficient to provide the defendant with
fair notice of the claim and its basis; (b) include a demand
for the relief sought; and (c) identify what injury he claims
to have suffered and what persons are responsible for each
such injury. In 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 Entry.
amended complaint should have the proper case number,
1:18-cv-04057-TWP-DLP and the words “Amended
Complaint” on the first page. The amended complaint
will completely replace the original. See Beal v.
Beller, 847 F.3d 897, 901 (7th Cir. 2017) (“For
pleading purposes, once an amended complaint is filed, the
original complaint drops out of the picture.”).
Therefore, it must set out every defendant, claim, and
factual allegation the plaintiff wishes to pursue in this
plaintiff files an amended complaint, it will be screened
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). If no amended
complaint is filed, this action will be dismissed ...