Wiggins v. Bergin

Filing 12

MERIT REVIEW AND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER - Entered by Judge Harold A. Baker on 4/17/2018. Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Plaintiff shall have 30 d ays from the entry of this order to file an amended complaint. Failure to file an amended complaint will result in the dismissal of this case, without prejudice, for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff's amended complaint will replace Plaintif f's original complaint in its entirety. Accordingly, the amended complaint must contain all allegations against all Defendants. Piecemeal amendments are not accepted. Plaintiff's motion for counsel 3 is denied, with leave to renew upon demonstrating that he made attempts to hire his own counsel. Plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction 4 is denied. (LN, ilcd)

E-FILED

Tuesday, 17 April, 2018 12:36:48 PM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
)
)
)
Defendants. )

MALCOLM WIGGINS,

v.
RITA BERGIN, et al.

18-1066

MERIT REVIEW AND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
This case is before the court for a merit review of the plaintiff's
claims. The court is required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A to “screen” the
plaintiff’s complaint, and through such process to identify and
dismiss any legally insufficient claim, or the entire action if
warranted. A claim is legally insufficient if it “(1) is frivolous,
malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted; or (2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is
immune from such relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
In reviewing the complaint, the Court accepts the factual
allegations as true, liberally construing them in the plaintiff’s favor.
Turley v. Rednour, 729 F.3d 645, 649 (7th Cir. 2013). However,
conclusory statements and labels are insufficient. Enough facts
Page 1 of 4

must be provided to “state a claim for relief that is plausible on its
face.” Alexander v. U.S., 721 F.3d 418, 422 (7th Cir. 2013)(citation
omitted).
Plaintiff is incarcerated at Illinois River Correctional Center.
Plaintiff alleges that he has been denied adequate access to the
prison law library, and that this denial has prejudiced another legal
claim in a way he does not describe. Exhibits plaintiff attached to
his complaint show that plaintiff was scheduled to receive passes to
the law library on at least ten (10) different dates during the
relevant time period. (Doc. 1 at 17). Moreover, plaintiff does not
describe how defendant Bergin, the “overseer of the Education
Department,” denied him access to the law library other than to say
she did so “intentionally and recklessly.”
Plaintiff must provide more information regarding the specific
actions defendant Bergin took to deny him access to the law library;
he cannot sue her just because she is in charge. Ashcroft v. Iqbal,
556 U.S. 662, 676 (2009). Furthermore, plaintiff must provide
some information regarding how the denial of access prejudiced an
otherwise meritorious claim. Marshall v. Knight, 445 F.3d 965, 968

Page 2 of 4

(7th Cir. 2006). The court will grant plaintiff an opportunity to
provide this information in an amended complaint.
It is therefore ordered:
1.

Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed for failure to state a

claim pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
Plaintiff shall have 30 days from the entry of this order to file an
amended complaint. Failure to file an amended complaint will
result in the dismissal of this case, without prejudice, for failure to
state a claim. Plaintiff's amended complaint will replace Plaintiff's
original complaint in its entirety. Accordingly, the amended
complaint must contain all allegations against all Defendants.
Piecemeal amendments are not accepted.
2.

Plaintiff’s motion for counsel [3] is denied, with leave to

renew upon demonstrating that he made attempts to hire his own
counsel. Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654-55 (7th Cir. 2007). This
typically requires writing to several lawyers and attaching the
responses. Although Plaintiff attached letters he had received from
attorneys in response to his requests for pro bono representation,
the letters predate Plaintiff’s claims in this case and appear to
address claims not related to this case. If Plaintiff renews his
Page 3 of 4

motion, he should set forth how far he has gone in school, any jobs
he has held inside and outside of prison, any classes he has taken
in prison, and any prior litigation experience he has.
3.

Plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order or

preliminary injunction [4] is denied. Plaintiff has not shown a
reasonable likelihood of success on the merits. See Foodcomm Int’l
v Barry, 328 F.3d 300, 303 (7th Cir. 2003).
Entered this 17th day of April, 2018.
/s/Harold A. Baker
___________________________________________
HAROLD A. BAKER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 4 of 4