United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Southeastern Division
DONALD L. CORNELL, Plaintiff,
UNKNOWN REED, Defendant.
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
EDWARD AUTREY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is before the Court on the complaint filed by
plaintiff Donald Cornell. Plaintiff has failed to file a
motion to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the full $400
filing fee. Additionally, he has failed to file his complaint
on a court-provided form in compliance with Local Rule
2.06(A). Accordingly, the Court will require plaintiff to
file an amended complaint on a court-form. Plaintiff will
also be required to file a motion to proceed in forma
pauperis with a prisoner account statement or pay the full
filing fee within thirty (30) days of the date of this
Memorandum and Order. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).
U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1)
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), a prisoner bringing a civil
action in forma pauperis is required to pay the full amount
of the filing fee. If the prisoner has insufficient funds in
his prison account to pay the entire fee, the Court must
assess and, when funds exist, collect an initial partial
filing fee of 20 percent of the greater of (1) the average
monthly deposits in the prisoner's account, or (2) the
average monthly balance in the prisoner's account for the
prior six-month period. After payment of the initial partial
filing fee, the prisoner is required to make monthly payments
of 20 percent of the preceding month's income credited to
the prisoner's account. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The
agency having custody of the prisoner will forward these
monthly payments to the Clerk of Court each time the amount
in the prisoner's account exceeds $10.00, until the
filing fee is fully paid. Id.
has failed to file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in
this action, along with a copy of his prison account
statement, or pay the full $400 filing fee. Therefore, the
Court will require plaintiff to either pay the filing fee in
full or file a motion for in forma pauperis along with a copy
of his prison account statement within thirty (30) days of
the date of this Memorandum and Order.
Standard on Initial Review
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court is required to dismiss
a complaint filed in forma pauperis if it is frivolous,
malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted. To state a claim for relief under § 1983, a
complaint must plead more than “legal
conclusions” and “[t]hreadbare recitals of the
elements of a cause of action [that are] supported by mere
conclusory statements.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556
U.S. 662, 678 (2009). A plaintiff must demonstrate a
plausible claim for relief, which is more than a “mere
possibility of misconduct.” Id. at 679.
“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.” Id. at 678. Determining
whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief is a
context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to,
inter alia, draw upon judicial experience and common
sense. Id. at 679.
complaints are to be liberally construed. Estelle v.
Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976). However, they still
must allege sufficient facts to support the claims alleged.
Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914-15 (8th Cir.
2004); see also Martin v. Aubuchon, 623 F.2d 1282,
1286 (8th Cir. 1980) (even pro se complaints are required to
allege facts which, if true, state a claim for relief as a
matter of law). Federal courts are not required to
“assume facts that are not alleged, just because an
additional factual allegation would have formed a stronger
complaint.” Stone, 364 F.3d at 914-15. In
addition, giving a pro se complaint the benefit of a liberal
construction does not mean that procedural rules in ordinary
civil litigation must be interpreted so as to excuse mistakes
by those who proceed without counsel. See McNeil v.
U.S., 508 U.S. 106, 113 (1993).
is an inmate at Southeast Correctional Center
(“SECC”). He brings this action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983 against Unknown Reed, his Functional Unit
Manager. He has handwritten his complaint on notebook paper,
and it numbers fourteen pages in total.
handwriting is somewhat difficult to read, but it appears he
is complaining about defendant Reed's failure to respond
to his request to file IRRs on several dates in April of
2019. Plaintiff asserts that he asked defendant Reed to file
paper IRRs when the J-Pay kiosk was broken, when he needed
his legal mail notarized, when an electric socket in his jail
cell was broken, and when he was not provided with clean
clothing in a timely manner. Although plaintiff does not
indicate what defendant Reed's response was to his
requests, it appears from his assertions that he believes his
rights were violated in some way by defendant Reed between
April 1, 2019 and April 11, 2019.
has not indicated the damages he is seeking in this lawsuit,
nor has plaintiff indicated the capacity under which he is
suing defendant Reed.
Court has reviewed the complaint and believes that, although
plaintiff may be able to assert claims based on the denial of
his constitutional rights, he must prepare an amended
complaint using a Court-provided form, following Rules 8 and
10 of ...