Werner v. Snyder-Spaar

• Decision Date: 27 December 2019
• Docket Number: 19-cv-648-bbc
• Parties: PATRICK WERNER, Plaintiff, v. ROSE SNYDER-SPAAR, AARON SABEL, CHRISTOPHER SUSA, JOHN DOE, JESSICA VANDER BLOOMER and KEVIN CARR, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Wisconsin

PATRICK WERNER, Plaintiff,
v.
ROSE SNYDER-SPAAR, AARON SABEL, CHRISTOPHER SUSA,
JOHN DOE, JESSICA VANDER BLOOMER and KEVIN CARR, Defendants.

19-cv-648-bbc

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

December 27, 2019

OPINION AND ORDER

Pro se plaintiff Patrick Werner filed this proposed civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 while he was incarcerated at the Oshkosh Correctional Institution, contending that correctional officials were going to place him on a global positioning tracking system for life after his release from prison, without due process and in violation of his constitutional rights. On October 8, 2019, I dismissed plaintiff's complaint without prejudice pursuant to the three strikes rule under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) because he had not prepaid the $400 filing fee or shown that he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. Dkt. #8.

Because plaintiff has now paid the full filing fee, I will reopen his case and screen it under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. (Although plaintiff has been released from prison, he was incarcerated at the time he filed his complaint and is currently incarcerated in the Brown County jail.) Also before the court are several motions filed by plaintiff: (1) a motion for an extension of time to pay the filing fee, dkt. #10, which is moot because plaintiff subsequently paid the filing fee; (2) a motion for leave to supplement the record with his

Page 2

declaration providing further information about the plans for his release from prison, dkt. #11; (3) several motions requesting a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunctive relief, dkt. ##12, 15-16; (4) a motion for leave to supplement his complaint with additional allegations that he labels an "amended statement of the case," dkt. #14; and (5) a motion requesting that the court provide him copies of all of his filings in this case and order the Brown County jail to provide him enough paper to draft a consolidated amended complaint based on those filings, dkt. #17.

After reviewing all of plaintiff's submissions, I conclude that plaintiff's allegations fail to state a federal claim upon which relief may be granted. Therefore, I am dismissing his complaint and denying his motions for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunctive relief. His remaining motions for an extension of time, leave to supplement his complaint and the record and additional paper to prepare an amended complaint based on his past allegations will be denied as moot.

OPINION

To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff must allege that: 1) he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and 2) the deprivation was caused by the defendant acting under color of state law. Buchanan-Moore v. County of Milwaukee, 570 F.3d 824,...