DUNN v. JONES et al

Filing 6

Entry Granting Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis, Discussing Complaint, and Directing Further Proceedings - Plaintiff Larry Dunn's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, dkt. 2 , is granted. The assessment of an initial partial filing fee is no t feasible at this time. Based on the screening described above, Dunn's claims shall proceed as claims that the defendants have violated his constitutional rights by ignoring his medical needs. If Dunn believes he has raised a claim that his not identified in this Entry, he shall have through October 2, 2017, to notify the Court. The clerk is designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to issue process to the defendants in the manner specified by Rule 4(d). Process shall consist of the complaint, applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons), and this Entry. See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/13/2017. (MAT)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
NEW ALBANY DIVISION

LARRY ANDREW DUNN, JR.,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
vs.
BRAD JONES Chief,
CONLIN Director,
SAM BEARD Major,
HOWARD Kitchen Officer Mrs.,
Defendants.

No. 4:17-cv-00173-TWP-DML

Entry Granting Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis,
Discussing Complaint, and Directing Further Proceedings
I.
Plaintiff Larry Dunn’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, dkt. [2], is granted. The
assessment of an initial partial filing fee is not feasible at this time.
II.
Because the plaintiff is a “prisoner” as defined by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(h), the complaint is
subject to the screening requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). Pursuant to this statute, “[a]
complaint is subject to dismissal for failure to state a claim if the allegations, taken as true, show
that plaintiff is not entitled to relief.” Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 215 (2007). To survive a
motion to dismiss, the complaint “must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state
a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. . . . A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff
pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is
liable for the misconduct alleged.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quotations

omitted). Pro se complaints such as that filed by the plaintiff, are construed liberally and held to
a less stringent standard than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S.
89, 94 (2007); Obriecht v. Raemisch, 517 F.3d 489, 491 n.2 (7th Cir. 2008).
Dunn, an inmate at the Clark County Jail, alleges that he is allergic to mayonnaise, ranch
dressing, and tartar sauce. He states that he had to file a number of grievances to obtain medical
orders for a diet that did not contain these foods and that the defendants are ignoring these
medical orders. In other words, he will often receive food trays that contain foods to which he is
allergic.
Based on the screening described above, Dunn’s claims shall proceed as claims that the
defendants have violated his constitutional rights by ignoring his medical needs. If Dunn believes
he has raised a claim that his not identified in this Entry, he shall have through October 2, 2017,
to notify the Court.
The clerk is designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to issue process to the
defendants in the manner specified by Rule 4(d). Process shall consist of the complaint,
applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons and Waiver
of Service of Summons), and this Entry.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: 9/13/2017

Distribution:
LARRY ANDREW DUNN, JR.
CLARK COUNTY JAIL
Inmate Mail/Parcels
501 East Court Avenue
Jeffersonville, IN 47130
Chief Brad Jones
Clark County Jail
501 East Court Avenue
Jeffersonville, IN 47130
Director Conlin
Clark County Jail
501 East Court Avenue
Jeffersonville, IN 47130
Major Sam Beard
Clark County Jail
501 East Court Avenue
Jeffersonville, IN 47130
Kitchen Officer Mrs. Howard
Clark County Jail
501 East Court Avenue
Jeffersonville, IN 47130