UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

MARIO F. BROWN, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 25-cv-0960-bhl

LT. COOK, LT. GRIPENTROG, CO LINDEN, CO PIERCE, CO BEDFORD, BRAD MLODZIK, JOHN DOES 1-4, and MR. KIRST,

Defendants.

SCREENING ORDER

Plaintiff Mario F. Brown, who is currently serving a state prison sentence at the Waupun Correctional Institution and representing himself, filed a complaint under

, alleging that his civil rights were violated. This matter comes before the Court on Brown’s motion for leave to proceed without prepaying the full filing fee and to screen the complaint. MOTION TO PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYING THE FILING FEE Brown has requested leave to proceed without prepaying the full filing fee (in forma pauperis). A prisoner plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis is required to pay the full amount of the $350.00 filing fee over time. See

(b)(1). As required under

(a)(2), Brown has filed a certified copy of his prison trust account statement for the six- month period immediately preceding the filing of his complaint and has been assessed and paid an initial partial filing fee of $32.31. Brown’s motion for leave to proceed without prepaying the filing fee will be granted. SCREENING OF THE COMPLAINT The Court has a duty to review any complaint in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity and must dismiss any complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised any claims that are legally “frivolous or

malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §1915A(b). In screening a complaint, the Court must determine whether the complaint complies with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and states at least plausible claims for which relief may be granted. To state a cognizable claim under the federal notice pleading system, a plaintiff is required to provide a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that [he] is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). It must be at least sufficient to provide notice to each defendant of what he or she is accused of doing, as well as when and where the alleged actions or inactions occurred, and the nature and extent of any damage or injury the actions or inactions caused. “The pleading standard Rule 8 announces does not require ‘detailed factual allegations,’

but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal,

(2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly,

(2007)). “The tenet that a court must accept as true all of the allegations contained in a complaint is inapplicable to legal conclusions. Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.”

A complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to “state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Twombly,

. “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.”

. “[T]he complaint’s allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.”

(internal quotations omitted). ALLEGATIONS OF THE COMPLAINT According to Brown, from February 20 through February 23, 2025, he was housed in a cell

in the restricted housing unit that had blood, OC spray, and feces on the walls, door, and floor. He states that there was also a crack in the window, which caused the cell to be freezing cold. Brown explains that he got sick from the cold and developed a rash from the unsanitary conditions. Brown asserts that he informed all of the Defendants about the unsanitary conditions and cracked window, but they refused to move him out of the cell. Dkt. No. 1. THE COURT’S ANALYSIS “The Eighth Amendment prohibits the States from subjecting prisoners to conditions of confinement amounting to cruel and unusual punishment.” Giles v. Godinez,

(7th Cir. 2019) (citations omitted). To state a claim, a plaintiff must allege that “the conditions are sufficiently serious—i.e., that they deny the inmate the minimal civilized measures of life’s

necessities, creating an excessive risk to the inmate’s health and safety,” and that the defendant was deliberately indifferent to that risk.

(citations omitted). With this standard in mind, the Court will allow Brown to proceed on an Eighth Amendment claim against the Defendants based on allegations that for three days, the Defendants refused to move Brown to a new cell after he informed them about the problematic conditions, resulting in him getting sick and breaking out in a rash. After the named Defendants have an opportunity to respond to Brown’s complaint, the Court will enter a scheduling order giving him the opportunity to use discovery to learn the names of the four unidentified Defendants. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Brown’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 2) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to an informal service agreement between the Wisconsin Department of Justice and this Court, copies of Brown’s complaint and this order

are being electronically sent today to the Wisconsin Department of Justice for service on Lt. Cook, Lt. Gripentrog, CO Linden, CO Pierce, CO Bedford, Brad Mlodzik, and Mr. Kirst. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to the informal service agreement between the Wisconsin Department of Justice and this Court, Lt. Cook, Lt. Gripentrog, CO Linden, CO Pierce, CO Bedford, Brad Mlodzik, and Mr. Kirst shall file a responsive pleading to the complaint within sixty days of receiving electronic notice of this order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that copies of this order be sent to the officer in charge of the agency where Brown is located. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the agency having custody of Brown shall collect from his institution trust account the $317.69 balance of the filing fee by collecting monthly payments

from Brown’s prison trust account in an amount equal to 20% of the preceding month’s income credited to the prisoner’s trust account and forwarding payments to the Clerk of Court each time the amount in the account exceeds $10 in accordance with

(b)(2). The payments shall be clearly identified by the case name and number assigned to this action. If Brown is transferred to another institution, the transferring institution shall forward a copy of this Order along with Brown’s remaining balance to the receiving institution. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties may not begin discovery until after the Court enters a scheduling order setting deadlines for discovery and dispositive motions. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs who are inmates at Prisoner E-Filing Program institutions must submit all correspondence and case filings to institution staff, who will scan and e-mail documents to the Court. The Prisoner E-Filing Program is mandatory for all inmates of Green Bay Correctional Institution, Waupun Correctional Institution, Dodge

Correctional Institution, Wisconsin Secure Program Facility, Columbia Correctional Institution, and Oshkosh Correctional Institution. Plaintiffs who are inmates at all other prison facilities must submit the original document for each filing to the Court to the following address: Office of the Clerk United States District Court Eastern District of Wisconsin 362 United States Courthouse 517 E. Wisconsin Avenue Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202

PLEASE DO NOT MAIL ANYTHING DIRECTLY TO THE COURT’S CHAMBERS. It will only delay the processing of the matter. Brown is further advised that failure to make a timely submission may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute. In addition, the parties must notify the Clerk of Court of any change of address. Failure to do so could result in orders or other information not being timely delivered, thus affecting the legal rights of the parties. Enclosed is a guide prepared by court staff to address common questions that arise in cases filed by prisoners. Entitled “Answers to Prisoner Litigants’ Common Questions,” this guide contains information that Brown may find useful in prosecuting this case. Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin on August 8, 2025. s/ Brett H. Ludwig BRETT H. LUDWIG United States District Judge