Solano v. Bailey et al

Filing 10

ORDER DISMISSING CASE with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted and for failure to comply with an order of this Court. This dismissal shall count as one of plaintiff's three allotted strikes within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 4/24/2017. (tjk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
ALLEN SOLANO,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No. 17 cv–0192 DRH

SUZANN BAILEY, et al.
Defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HERNDON, District Judge:
On February 22, 2017, plaintiff filed this complaint alleging that his
constitutional rights had been violated by the soy-heavy diet served at Pickneyville
Correctional Center. (Doc. 1).

On March 22, 2017, the Court screened this case

pursuant to § 1915A and determined that the complaint failed to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted and that the defendants were entitled to
qualified immunity.

(Doc. 9). The Court ordered plaintiff to file an amended

complaint stating any facts which may exist to support a medical deliberate
indifference claim, no later than April 17, 2017. (Doc. 9). To date plaintiff has
not filed an amended complaint or petitioned the Court for an extension of time to
do so.
As a result, this case is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted and for failure to comply with an order of
1

this Court. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b); see generally Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d
1051 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 1994). This
dismissal shall count as one of plaintiff’s three allotted “strikes” within the
meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
If plaintiff wishes to appeal this Order, he may file a notice of appeal with
this Court within thirty days of the entry of judgment. FED. R. APP. 4(A)(4). If
plaintiff does choose to appeal, he will be liable for the $505.00 appellate filing fee
irrespective of the outcome of the appeal.

See FED. R. APP. 3(e); 28 U.S.C. §

1915(e)(2); Ammons v. Gerlinger, 547 F.3d 724, 725-26 (7th Cir. 2008); Sloan v.

Lesza, 181 F.3d 857, 858-59 (7th Cir. 1999); Lucien v. Jockish, 133 F.3d 464,
467 (7th Cir. 1998). If the appeal is found to be non-meritorious,plaintiff may
also incur another “strike.” A timely motion filed pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 59(e) may toll the 30-day appeal deadline. 1 FED. R. APP. 4(a)(4).
The Clerk’s Office is DIRECTED to close this case and enter judgment
accordingly.

Digitally signed by
Judge David R.
Herndon
Date: 2017.04.24
14:52:41 -05'00'

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: April 24, 2017

United States District Judge

1

A Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend a judgment must be filed no later than 28 days after the
entry of the judgment. FED. R. CIV. P. 59(e).

2