BELL v. INDIANAPOLIS INDIANA POLICE

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

THOMAS PHILLIP BELL, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:20-cv-00651-JPH-DLP ) INDIANAPOLIS INDIANA POLICE, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER DISMISSING CASE On March 19, 2020, the Court screened Plaintiff Thomas Bell’s complaint and dismissed it for failure to state a plausible claim. Dkt. 5 at 2–3. The Court gave Mr. Bell through April 30, 2020 to file an amended complaint. Id. Mr. Bell has filed an amended complaint, dkt. 10, but the amended complaint also does not state a plausible claim. Instead, it provides details about Mr. Bell’s car and his possessions that were in the car, including his radio and clothing. Id. at 1–2. The amended complaint mentions “defective traffic signals and traffic lights,” and a “scam” to increase revenue in Indiana, but it provides no facts in support and does not identify any defendants who may be responsible for those things. Id. at 3. The amended complaint therefore does not “state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). Mr. Bell’s claims are DISMISSED with prejudice. See Paul v. Marberry, 658 F.3d 702, 704–05 (7th Cir. 2011). His motions for contempt of court, dkt. [6], for “EEOC,” dkt. [8], to keep a witness private, dkt. [9], and to dismiss claims, dkt. [11] are DENIED as moot. Final judgment will issue by separate entry. SO ORDERED. Date: 5/1/2020 Sjamu Patrick hawlove James Patrick Hanlon United States District Judge Southern District of Indiana Distribution: THOMAS PHILLIP BELL 4521 E. Washington Street Apt. A2 Indianapolis, IN 46201