Coleman v. Larson

• Court: District Court, C.D. Illinois
• Decided: July 31, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-01291
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS PEORIA DIVISION

RHONDA COLEMAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) 1:25-cv-01291-MMM ) ROGER LARSON, ) ) Defendant. )

MERIT REVIEW ORDER Plaintiff, proceeding pro se from the Fulton County Jail, pursues an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff’s complaint is before the Court for a merit review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. In reviewing the complaint, the Court accepts the factual allegations as true, liberally construing them in Plaintiff’s favor. Turley v. Rednour, 729 F.3d 645, 649-51 (7th Cir. 2013). However, conclusory statements and labels are insufficient. Enough facts must be provided to “state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face.” Alexander v. United States, 721 F.3d 418, 422 (7th Cir. 2013) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). While the pleading standard does not require “detailed factual allegations,” it requires “more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Wilson v. Ryker, 451 F. App’x 588, 589 (7th Cir. 2011) (quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)). ALLEGATIONS Plaintiff seeks to sue Roger Larson. Plaintiff alleges that Larson is performing services at North Central Behavioral Center in Canton Illinois and that Patti Oest is also

performing services at North Central Behavioral Center. ANALYSIS Plaintiff’s allegations do not state a claim. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff is allowed 14 days to file an amended complaint if she believes she can do so consistent with this order. If Plaintiff does not amend the case will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim.

Entered this 31st day of July, 2025. s/ Michael M. Mihm MICHAEL M. MIHM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE