United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Terre Haute Division
ENTRY GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS, SCREENING COMPLAINT, AND DIRECTING ISSUANCE OF
PROCESS
James
Patrick Hanlon United States District Judge
This
action is before the Court for resolution of Plaintiff Lance
Walters' motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, dkt. 2; for screening of his complaint
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a); and for issuance of
process on the defendants.
I.
Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma
Pauperis
Mr.
Walters' motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, dkt. [2], is GRANTED.
Notwithstanding the foregoing ruling, Mr. Walters remains
liable for the full amount of the filing fee. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(b)(1). However, the assessment of even an initial
partial filing fee is waived because the plaintiff has no
assets and no means by which to pay a partial filing fee. 28
U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4). Accordingly, no initial partial
filing fee is due at this time.
II.
Screening
Mr.
Walters is an inmate at Putnamville Correctional Facility
(PCF). Because Mr. Walters is a “prisoner” as
defined by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(c), this Court has an
obligation under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a) to screen his
complaint.
A.
Screening Standard
Pursuant
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
dismissal,
[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).
B.
The Complaint
Mr.
Walters' complaint concerns his treatment by the PCF
staff for lupus since mid-October of 2019. He presents a
litany of allegations against eleven defendants. While some
of Mr. Walters' allegation support plausible claims that
will proceed in this action, others are insufficient and must
be dismissed.
1.
Claims That Will Proceed
Wexford
Health Sources, Inc., has contracted with the Indiana
Department of Correction to treat inmates at PCF.
Wexford's employees at PCF include Dr. Pablo Perez, Nurse
Practitioner ...