Powers v. Scott et al

Filing 11

MERIT REVIEW OPINION: Plaintiff's petition to proceed in forma pauperis is granted 2 . This case is now in the process of service. The Court will attempt service on Defendants by sending each Defendant a waiver of service. The Clerk is direc ted to enter the standard qualified protective order pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Plaintiff's motions to reconsider the assessment of a partial filing fee are granted 6 , 7 , but only to the extent Plai ntiff seeks an extension to make his $19.34 payment. The deadline is extended to February 23, 2015. Plaintiff may file another motion for an extension by February 23, 2015, attaching his trust fund ledgers from 7/1/2014 through February 20, 2015. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 11/11/2014. (ME, ilcd)

E-FILED

Tuesday, 11 November, 2014 03:47:43 PM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
THOMAS POWERS,
Plaintiff,
v.
GREGG SCOTT, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

14-CV-3148

MERIT REVIEW OPINION
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and detained in the Rushville
Treatment and Detention Center, seeks leave to proceed in forma
pauperis. He alleges that Defendants store shaving razors in a
manner which permits the transmission of serious blood-borne
diseases. He also alleges that at times some of the Defendants
intentionally switch residents’ razors despite the risk of disease
transmission, in retaliation for Plaintiff’s grievances.
At this point, the Court cannot rule out a constitutional claim
of deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of serious harm. This
case will proceed pursuant to the standard procedures.
IT IS ORDERED:
Page 1 of 5 

1.

Plaintiff's petition to proceed in forma pauperis is granted

(2). Pursuant to a review of the Complaint, the Court finds that
Plaintiff states the following claims: 1) a claim for deliberate
indifference to a substantial risk of serious harm arising from the
manner in which shaving razors are stored and distributed; and 2)
a claim for retaliation for Plaintiff’s exercise of his First Amendment
rights. This case proceeds solely on the claims identified in this
paragraph. Any additional claims shall not be included in the
case, except at the Court’s discretion on motion by a party for good
cause shown or pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15.
2.

This case is now in the process of service. Plaintiff is

advised to wait until counsel has appeared for Defendants before
filing any motions, in order to give Defendants notice and an
opportunity to respond to those motions. Motions filed before
Defendants' counsel has filed an appearance will generally be
denied as premature. Plaintiff need not submit any evidence to the
Court at this time, unless otherwise directed by the Court.
3.

The Court will attempt service on Defendants by sending

each Defendant a waiver of service. Defendants have 60 days from
the date the waiver of service is sent to file an Answer. If
Page 2 of 5 

Defendants have not filed Answers or appeared through counsel
within 90 days of the entry of this order, Plaintiff may file a motion
requesting the status of service. After counsel has appeared for
Defendants, the Court will enter a scheduling order setting
deadlines for discovery and dispositive motions.
4.

With respect to a Defendant who no longer works at the

address provided by Plaintiff, the entity for whom that Defendant
worked while at that address shall provide to the Clerk said
Defendant's current work address, or, if not known, said
Defendant's forwarding address. This information shall be used
only for effectuating service. Documentation of forwarding
addresses shall be retained only by the Clerk and shall not be
maintained in the public docket nor disclosed by the Clerk.
5.

Defendants shall file an answer within 60 days of the day

the waiver of service is sent by the Clerk. A motion to dismiss is
not an answer. The answer should include all defenses appropriate
under the Federal Rules. The answer and subsequent pleadings
shall be to the issues and claims stated in this Opinion.
6.

Once counsel has appeared for a Defendant, Plaintiff need

not send copies of his filings to that Defendant or to that
Page 3 of 5 

Defendant's counsel. Instead, the Clerk will file Plaintiff's document
electronically and send a notice of electronic filing to defense
counsel. The notice of electronic filing shall constitute service on
Defendants pursuant to Local Rule 5.3. If electronic service on
Defendants is not available, Plaintiff will be notified and instructed
accordingly.
7.

Counsel for Defendants is hereby granted leave to depose

Plaintiff at Plaintiff's place of confinement. Counsel for Defendants
shall arrange the time for the deposition.
8.

Plaintiff shall immediately notify the Court, in writing, of

any change in his mailing address and telephone number.
Plaintiff's failure to notify the Court of a change in mailing address
or phone number will result in dismissal of this lawsuit, with
prejudice.
9.

If a Defendant fails to sign and return a waiver of service

to the clerk within 30 days after the waiver is sent, the Court will
take appropriate steps to effect formal service through the U.S.
Marshal's service on that Defendant and will require that Defendant
to pay the full costs of formal service pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 4(d)(2).
Page 4 of 5 

10. The Clerk is directed to enter the standard qualified
protective order pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability
and Accountability Act.
11. The Clerk is directed to attempt service on Defendants
pursuant to the standard procedures.
12. Plaintiff’s motions to reconsider the assessment of a
partial filing fee are granted (6, 7), but only to the extent
Plaintiff seeks an extension to make his $19.34 payment. The
deadline is extended to February 23, 2015.

Plaintiff may file

another motion for an extension by February 23, 2015,
attaching his trust fund ledgers from 7/1/2014 through
February 20, 2015.
ENTERED: 11/11/2014
FOR THE COURT:
s/Sue E. Myerscough
SUE E. MYERSCOUGH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 5 of 5