Monson v. Rednour et al

Filing 34

MEMORANDUM & ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations Doc. 33 and GRANTING Defendant Nwaobasi's Motion to Dismiss (construed as Motion for Summary Judgment) 13 . See attached for details. Signed by Judge Michael J. Reagan on 07/17/13. (dkd )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
ROBERT MONSON,
Plaintiff,
vs.
DR. SAM NWAOBASI,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 12–cv–1262–MJR–SCW

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION &
GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
REAGAN, District Judge:
In December 2012, pro se Plaintiff Robert Monson, an inmate at Illinois’ Menard
Correctional Center, sued Dr. Sam Nwaobasi and other defendants, named and unnamed, for
violating his constitutional rights. Upon threshold review of the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915A, the undersigned dismissed all named Plaintiffs except Dr. Nwaobasi, whom Munson alleges
violated his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishments via deliberate
indifference to a brown recluse spider bite. (Monson’s claims against the John Doe defendants
survived screening, and are still part of this case).
Nwaobasi moved to dismiss on January 31, 2013 (Doc. 13), arguing Plaintiff failed to
exhaust his administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e, the Prison Litigation Reform
Act (“PLRA”). Plaintiff filed a brief in opposition to the motion to dismiss (Doc. 13).

In

accordance with Seventh Circuit precedent, Magistrate Judge Williams construed Nwaobasi’s motion
as one for summary judgment. S ee Pavey v. Conley , 544 F.3d 739, 741 (7th Cir. 2008) (rejecting
the approach of raising the affirmative defense of failure to exhaust on a motion to dismiss).

Because the parties disputed material facts regarding exhaustion, Judge Williams set an evidentiary
hearing for April 16, 2013.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(B) and (c), and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
72(b), Judge Williams submitted a Report (Doc. 33) to the undersigned District Judge, in which he
recommends the Court adopt his findings of fact and conclusions of law and grant Nwaobasi’s
Motion for Summary Judgment. Though he granted Plaintiff’s objection to an affidavit that claimed
Plaintiff filed no grievances from December 2012 through the present, Judge Williams found
Plaintiff’s testimony—that Plaintiff did file a grievance regarding his spider bite—to be not credible.
Noting that Plaintiff’s Complaint included four specific assertions that either state or imply Plaintiff
did not file an administrative grievance, Judge Williams found Plaintiff failed to exhaust his
administrative remedies.
The Report was sent to the parties with a “NOTICE” informing them of their right
to appeal by way of an objection filed within fourteen days of service (on or before May 10, 2013).
To date, no objections have been filed. The period in which such objections may be filed has
expired, so pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) this Court need not conduct de novo review.

T homas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140, 149–52 (1985); Banco Del Atlantico, S.A. v. Woods Indus. , 519
F.3d 350, 354 (7th Cir. 2008); Video Views, Inc. v. Studio 21, Ltd. 797 F.2d 538, 539–40 (7th
Cir. 1986)
Accordingly, the undersigned District Judge ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Williams’
Report and Recommendation (Doc. 33) in its entirety and GRANTS Nwaobasi’s motion for
summary judgment (Doc. 13). Plaintiff’s § 1983 claim against Defendant Nwaobasi is DISMISSED
without prejudice. The only remaining claims in this case are Plaintiff’s claims against John Doe
Defendants.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: July 17, 2013___

s/ Michael J. Reagan
MICHAEL J. REAGAN
United States District Judge