United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
NATE A. LINDELL, Plaintiff,
WILLIAM POLLARD, ANTHONY MELI, ED WALL, LT. DANIEL CUSHING, JOHN DOES, Defendants.
ADELMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Nate A. Lindell, an inmate confined at the Columbia
Correctional Institution, filed a pro se complaint
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that the defendants
violated his constitutional rights. This order resolves
plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed without prepaying
the filing fee and screens his complaint.
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYING THE FILING
Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) applies to this case
because plaintiff was a prisoner when he filed his complaint.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(h). The PLRA allows the
court to give a prisoner plaintiff the ability to proceed
with his case without prepaying the civil case filing fee. 28
U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). When funds exist, the prisoner must
pay an initial partial filing fee. 28 U.S.C. §
1915(b)(1). He must then pay the balance of the $350 filing
fee over time, through deductions from his prisoner account.
31, 2019, I ordered that plaintiff did not have to pay an
initial partial filing fee and gave him twenty-one days to
voluntarily dismiss this case. (ECF No. 6.) Plaintiff did not
voluntarily dismiss the case. I will grant plaintiff's
motion for leave to proceed without prepaying the filing fee.
He must pay the remainder of the filing fee over time in the
manner explained at the end of this order.
SCREENING THE COMPLAINT
Federal Screening Standard
the PLRA, I must screen complaints brought by prisoners
seeking relief from a governmental entity or officer or
employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a).
I must dismiss a complaint if the prisoner raises claims that
are legally “frivolous or malicious, ” that fail
to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that
seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b).
determining whether the complaint states a claim, I apply the
same standard that applies to dismissals under Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). See Cesal v. Moats, 851
F.3d 714, 720 (7th Cir. 2017) (citing Booker-El v.
Superintendent, Ind. State Prison, 668 F.3d 896, 899
(7th Cir. 2012)). To state a claim, a complaint must include
“a short and plain statement of the claim showing that
the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P.
8(a)(2). The complaint must contain enough facts, accepted as
true, to “state a claim for relief that is plausible on
its face.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,
678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly,
550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). “A claim has facial
plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that
allows a court to draw the reasonable inference that the
defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.”
Id. (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556).
state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a
plaintiff must allege that someone deprived him of a right
secured by the Constitution or the laws of the United States,
and that whoever deprived him of this right was acting under
the color of state law. D.S. v. E. Porter Cty. Sch.
Corp., 799 F.3d 793, 798 (7th Cir. 2015) (citing
Buchanan- Moore v. Cty. of Milwaukee, 570 F.3d 824,
827 (7th Cir. 2009)). I construe pro se complaints
liberally and hold them to a less stringent standard than
pleadings drafted by lawyers. Cesal, 851 F.3d at 720
(citing Perez v. Fenoglio, 792 F.3d 768, 776 (7th
is suing former Wisconsin Department of Corrections Secretary
Ed Wall; former Waupun Correctional Institution (WCI) Warden
William Pollard; WCI Security Director Anthony Meli; former
WCI Correctional Officer Daniel Cushing; and unidentified Doe
defendants. He sues all defendants in their individual
alleges that shortly after he arrived at WCI in early January
of 2013, he heard staff severely injure another inmate.
Plaintiff also heard from other prisoners that staff sexually
assaulted them during what staff called “staff-assisted
strip searches.” Defendant John Doe #1, a supervisory
official at WCI, directed subordinates to perform
staff-assisted strip searches on any prisoners who were
placed in control status, which is a status that prisoners
were automatically put in when staff accused them of
resisting or attacking staff, or damaging their cells.
Meli issued conduct reports to prisoners who filed PREA
(Prison Rape Elimination Act) complaints about staff,
charging the prisoners with lying about staff. This deterred
prisoners from complaining about staff and emboldened staff