United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYING FILING FEE (DKT. NO. 5), SCREENING
COMPLAINT UNDER 28 U.S.C. §1915A AND DISMISSING
PAMELA PEPPER CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Paul Ambeau, who is confined at the Brown County Detention
Center and representing himself, filed a complaint under 42
U.S.C. §1983, alleging that the defendants violated his
constitutional rights. Dkt. No. 1. This decision resolves the
plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed without prepaying
the filing fee, dkt. no. 5, and screens his complaint, dkt.
Motion for Leave to Proceed without Prepaying the Filing Fee
(Dkt. No. 2)
Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) applies to this case
because the 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 then must pay the balance of the $350
filing fee over time, through deductions from his prisoner
November 13, 2019, the court ordered the plaintiff to pay an
initial partial filing fee of $10.00. Dkt. No. 6. The court
received that fee on November 18, 2019. The court will grant
the plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed without
prepaying the filing fee, and will allow him to 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, the court 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). The court 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.
determining whether the complaint states a claim, the court
applies the same standard that it applies when considering
whether to dismiss a case 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)). The court liberally construes
complaints filed by plaintiffs who are representing
themselves and holds such complaints 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 Cir. 2015)).
The Plaintiff's Allegations
plaintiff alleges that on November 12, 2018, he was released
from confinement and admitted to the St. John the Evangelist
Homeless Shelter in Green Bay, Wisconsin. Dkt. No. 1 at 4. He
says that this is a “regional shelter, ” meaning
that it is open during the winter, from about November 1
through May 30. Id. The plaintiff alleges that on
April 5, 2019, he told his probation agent, defendant Brooke
Klemann, that he was homeless. Id. She allegedly
told him that she could not help him at that time, and she
informed him of his next office appointment. Id.
plaintiff states that after speaking with Agent Klemann, he
called his brother who lives in Milwaukee. Id. On
April 6, 2019, the plaintiff's brother allegedly gave him
money for a bus ticket, and he took a bus to Milwaukee.
Id. The plaintiff states that he informed Klemann
that he was in Milwaukee and asked her to “transfer
[his] probation” to Milwaukee. Id.
plaintiff alleges that while in Milwaukee he contacted
someone in probation and parole at the Division of Community
Corrections and informed them that Klemann was his agent.
Id. He says that he provided Klemann with an address
where he would be living so that the residence could be
assessed for the probation transfer. Id. at 5. The
plaintiff alleges that he had a new agent in Milwaukee.
Id. He states that in May 2019 someone came to
assess the ...