Jones v. Westville Facility et al
OPINION AND ORDER: The Court DISMISSES this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A because it is frivolous. Signed by Judge Jon E DeGuilio on 12/6/2017. (lhc)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
SOUTH BEND DIVISION
WESTVILLE FACILITY, et al.,
CAUSE NO. 3:17-CV-666-JD-MGG
OPINION AND ORDER
Ralph Jones, a prisoner without a lawyer, is an inmate at Westville Correctional Facility.
He has filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against correctional officers and medical staff.
(ECF 1.) Jones makes many implausible allegations in his complaint. Jones alleges that he was
tortured through “virtual reality” at Pendleton Correctional Facility on a daily basis and that the
torture has continued after his transfer to Westville Correctional Facility. He also claims that
medical staff examined him and found evidence of the “virtual reality” torture, including injuries
to his teeth, gums, throat, and body cavities. He seeks money damages and criminal charges.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, this court is required to review cases filed by prisoners and
must dismiss claims if they are frivolous or malicious or if they fail to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted. Claims may be dismissed as factually frivolous if they are “clearly baseless,”
“fanciful,” “fantastic,” “delusional,” “irrational,” or “wholly incredible.” Denton v. Hernandez,
504 U.S. 25, 32–33 (1992); Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Gladney v. Pendleton
Correctional Facility, 302 F.3d 773, 774 (7th Cir. 2002). Jones’ allegations about correctional
officers using virtual reality as torture are factually frivolous, warranting dismissal of the
For these reasons, the court DISMISSES this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A because
it is frivolous.
ENTERED: December 6, 2017
/s/ JON E. DEGUILIO
United States District Court
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?