Lemay v. Mabrito et al
| Tamara Lemay |
| Mason Mabrito, Michelle Ivry, Shavonna Planer and Rickey Ament |
| 1:2020cv07474 |
| December 9, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Manish S Shah |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 6, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| MAILED copy of order dated 1/5/2021 to Plaintiff. (bg, ) |
| Filing 8 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis #4 is granted. The court screens the complaint under 28 USC sec. 1915(e) and determines that it does not state a claim for relief. Plaintiff names individual defendants and alleges that they have violated HIPAA and interfered in the payment of veterans benefits by destroying records. There is no private right of action under HIPAA. Lawsuits against individual federal officials for violating constitutional rights are limited to a type of case known as a Bivens action. The complaint does not adequately plead a recognized Bivens claim. The complaint mentions the taking of property, but there is no Bivens action for such a taking in this context. See Wilkie v. Robbins, 551 US 537 (2007); Schweiker v. Chilicky, 487 US 412 (1988). Interference with benefits can be raised administratively, and in some cases, a lawsuit against the United States can be filed under the Tucker Act in the Court of Federal Claims. The complaint is dismissed without prejudice and plaintiff has until February 9, 2021 to file an amended complaint, if plaintiff believes she can cure the problems identified in this order and state a claim against these defendants. If no amended complaint is filed, the dismissal will convert to a dismissal with prejudice (but without prejudice to pursuing administrative claims or claims against the United States in the Court of Federal Claims) and this case will be closed. The motion for attorney representation #5 is denied without prejudice. Plaintiff has only contacted one organization to seek representation. Plaintiff should reach out to more organizations to make a good-faith effort to find counsel on her own. The court notes, for example, that there are veterans organizations that assist veterans with claims for benefits. The UIC John Marshall Law School Veterans Legal Clinic is one such organization that specializes in representing veterans in benefits appeals. In addition, plaintiff reports a post-graduate education. She is capable of addressing the issues raised in this order and pursuing a case in its earliest stages. The Clerk's Office is directed to mail a copy of this order to plaintiff. Notices mailed. (psm, ) |
| Filing 5 MOTION by Plaintiff Tamara Lemay for attorney representation. (nsf, ) |
| Filing 4 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Tamara Lemay for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (nsf, ) |
| Filing 3 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Tamara Lemay. (nsf, ) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet. (nsf, ) |
| Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint and 0v copies by Tamara Lemay. (nsf, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
