Hines v. Martin et al

Filing 5

WRITTEN Opinion entered by the Honorable Samuel Der-Yeghiayan on 10/20/2011: For the reasons stated below, and even when liberally construing the pro se complaint, Plaintiff has failed to state a valid federal claim for relief. Therefore, the instant action is dismissed. All pending motions are stricken as moot. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice (tlm)

Order Form (01/2005)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois
Name of Assigned Judge
or Magistrate Judge

Samuel Der-Yeghiayan

CASE NUMBER

11 C 6389

CASE
TITLE

Sitting Judge if Other
than Assigned Judge

DATE

10/20/2011

Tyrone Hines (K-77115) vs. James F Martin

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT

For the reasons stated below, and even when liberally construing the pro se complaint, Plaintiff has failed to
state a valid federal claim for relief. Therefore, the instant action is dismissed. All pending motions are
stricken as moot. Civil case terminated.

O[ For further details see text below.]

Docketing to mail notices.

STATEMENT
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff Tyrone Hines’ (Hines) motion for leave to proceed in
forma pauperis and motion for appointment of counsel. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, “[n]otwithstanding
any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if
the court determines that . . . the action . . . fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. . . .” Id
Hines brought the instant action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Section 1983) for alleged constitutional
violations. Hines alleges that in 2007 he underwent some type of medical procedure and that he suffers from
certain physical ailments and symptoms. Hines contends that he applied for “supplemental security income”
and that the request was denied on February 14, 2008. (Compl. 4). Hines
seeks as relief “total pass and future [sic] payments plus all court fees paid for.” (Compl. 6). Since Hines is
proceeding pro se, the court has liberally construed his complaint. However, Hines has failed to allege facts
to plausibly suggest a constitutional violation. In addition, Hines has not provided any information
concerning the alleged denial of his claim for social security benefits other than the date of denial and thus
the court cannot even ascertain, for example, whether an appeal has already been resolved in regard to the
alleged denial. To the extent that Hines is attempting to appeal a final decision by the Commissioner of
11C6389 Tyrone Hines (K-77115) vs. James F Martin

Page 1 of 2

STATEMENT
Social Security, such an appeal generally must be made within 60 days. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Hines alleges
that the denial occurred in 2008 and has not alleged any facts that would plausibly suggest that his filing in
September 2011 is timely or that there was a valid basis for such a late filing. Since Hines is proceeding pro
se, the court has liberally construed his complaint. Even when liberally construing the pro se complaint,
Hines has failed to state a valid federal claim for relief. Therefore, the instant action is dismissed. All
pending motions are stricken as moot.

11C6389 Tyrone Hines (K-77115) vs. James F Martin

Page 2 of 2