Loren D. Gary Esq. v. Trent Allen, Charley Fox, Andy Cole, Llyod Arnold, Ernest Capt'n, Jackson Capt'n, Hoak Sgt., Saxon Sgt.

District Court, S.D. Indiana·Decided April 20, 2026·No. 1:25-cv-01555·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

LOREN D. GARY Esq., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:25-cv-01555-JRO-MJD ) TRENT ALLEN, ) CHARLEY FOX, ) ANDY COLE, ) LLYOD ARNOLD, ) ERNEST Capt'n, ) JACKSON Capt'n, ) HOAK Sgt., ) SAXON Sgt., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT

The Court's screening order at Docket No. 12 dismissed the operative complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The plaintiff was given a period of time in which to file an amended complaint that would cure the deficiencies identified in the Court's order. Dkt. 12 at 8–9. The Court also warned the plaintiff that "if no amended complaint is filed, this action will be dismissed without further notice or opportunity to show cause." Id. at 9. The plaintiff has failed to amend his complaint, and the deadline to do so has passed. For the reasons stated in the Court's screening order, the plaintiff's allegations are insufficient to state a claim. Id. at 3–8. Therefore, this action is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; see also Childress v. Walker, 787 F.3d 433, 441 (7th Cir. 2015); Paul v. Marberry, 658 F.3d 702, 705 (7th Cir. 2011). Also, because this case is being dismissed for failure to state a claim, the plaintiff is warned that it may constitute a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), which limits a prisoner's ability to proceed in forma pauperis after having three cases or appeals dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See Hill v. Madison Cty., Ill, 983 F.3d 904, 906 (7th Cir. 2020) ("It makes good sense for a judge who believes a dismissal to come within the scope of § 1915(g) to include notice to that effect," even though later courts must make the conclusive determination of whether each prior dismissal meets the statutory definition). In addition, the Court informs the plaintiff that he has now accumulated at least three possible "strikes" for purposes of proceeding in forma pauperis in future cases. See Gary v. Thompson, No. 1:25-cv-01274-TWP-MG, dkt. 8 (dismissing action for failure to state a claim); Gary v. O'Brien, No. 1:25-cv- 01416-SEB-CSW, dkt. 8 (same); Gary v. O'Brien, No. 1:25-cv-01519-SEB-CSW, dkt. 8 (same). Final judgment shall now issue by separate entry. SO ORDERED. Date: 4/20/2026 stin R. Olson United States District Judge Southern District of Indiana

Distribution:

LOREN D. GARY 251375 PENDLETON - CF PENDLETON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY Inmate Mail/Parcels 4490 West Reformatory Road PENDLETON, IN 46064

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Loren D. Gary Esq. v. Trent Allen, Charley Fox, Andy Cole, Llyod Arnold, Ernest Capt'n, Jackson Capt'n, Hoak Sgt., Saxon Sgt., (S.D. Ind. 2026).

Loren D. Gary Esq. v. Trent Allen, Charley Fox, Andy Cole, Llyod Arnold, Ernest Capt'n, Jackson Capt'n, Hoak Sgt., Saxon Sgt. (Loren D. Gary Esq. v. Trent Allen, Charley Fox, Andy Cole, Llyod Arnold, Ernest Capt'n, Jackson Capt'n, Hoak Sgt., Saxon Sgt.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jeffery Paul v. Helen Marberry
658 F.3d 702 (Seventh Circuit, 2011)
Craig Childress v. Roger Walker, Jr.
787 F.3d 433 (Seventh Circuit, 2015)
Hubert Hill v. Madison County, Illinois
983 F.3d 904 (Seventh Circuit, 2020)