United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF THE FILING FEE (DKT. NO. 2) AND
SCREENING COMPLAINT UNDER 28 U.S.C. §1915A
PAMELA PEPPER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
plaintiff, who is representing himself, was confined at the
Milwaukee County Jail when he filed the complaint. Dkt. No.
1. He alleges that the defendants violated his constitutional
rights. Id. This order resolves the plaintiff's
motion for leave to proceed without prepayment of the filing
fee and screens the plaintiff's complaint.
Motion for Leave to Proceed Without Prepaying the Filing
Prison Litigation Reform Act applies to this case because the
plaintiff was in custody when he filed the complaint. 28
U.S.C. §1915. The law allows a court to let a prisoner
proceed with his lawsuit without pre-paying the civil case
filing fee, as long as he meets certain conditions.
Id. One of those conditions is a requirement that
the plaintiff pay an initial partial filing fee. 28 U.S.C.
§1915(b). Once the plaintiff pays the initial partial
filing fee, if he still is a prisoner, the court may allow
the plaintiff to pay the balance of the $350 filing fee over
time, through deductions from his prisoner account.
January 27, 2017, the court assessed an initial partial
filing fee of $9.53. Dkt. No. 7. The plaintiff paid that
amount on February 13, 2017. The plaintiff, however, is no
longer a prisoner, so the court cannot allow him to pay the
remainder of the filing fee out of his prisoner account. The
court will grant the plaintiff's motion for leave to
proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, and will direct
the plaintiff to pay the remaining balance of the filing fee
as described at the end of this order.
Screening the Complaint
Standard for Screening Complaints
Prison Litigation Reform Act requires federal courts to
screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against
a governmental entity or officer or employee of a
governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. §1915A(a). The court may
dismiss a case, or part of it, if the claims alleged are
“frivolous or malicious, ” fail to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief
from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C.
state a claim under the federal notice pleading system, the
plaintiff must provide a “short and plain statement of
the claim showing that [he] is entitled to relief[.]”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). The complaint need not plead specific
facts, and need only provide “fair notice of what the .
. . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.”
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)
(quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)).
“Labels and conclusions, ” however, or a
“formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of
action” will not do. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556
U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at
factual content of the complaint must allow the court to
“draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is
liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id.
Indeed, allegations must “raise a right to relief above
the speculative level.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at
555. Factual allegations, when accepted as true, must state a
claim that is “plausible on its face.”
Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678.
courts follow the two-step analysis set forth in
Twombly to determine whether a complaint states a
claim. Id. at 679. First, the court determines
whether the plaintiff's legal conclusions are supported
by factual allegations. Id. Legal conclusions not
supported by facts “are not entitled to the assumption
of truth.” Id. Second, the court determines
whether the well-pleaded factual allegations “plausibly
give rise to an entitlement to relief.” Id.
The court gives pro se allegations, “however
inartfully pleaded, ” a liberal construction. See
Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (quoting
Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976)).
Facts Alleged in the Complaint
plaintiff alleges that he was confined at the Milwaukee
County Jail from May 2016 through August 2016. Dkt. No. 1 at
2. He sues Officer Brito and Officer J. Ramsey Guy, who
worked at the jail at that time. Id. at 1.
plaintiff alleges that between the dates of May 4 and May 17,
2016, during first shift, the defendants beat and sodomized
him in his cell. Id. He indicates that because of
his emotional state, he cannot recall the exact date, but
indicates that on the same day the incident happened, he
reported it to two lieutenants and filed a written grievance.
Id. at 2. He also indicates ...