Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_24-cv-01126/USCOURTS-ared-4_24-cv-01126-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

CENTRAL DIVISION 

MATEO JIMENEZ, JR. PLAINTIFF 

 

V. NO. 4:24-cv-01126-BRW-ERE 

W.C. DUB BRASSELL DET. CENTER DEFENDANT 

ORDER 

I. Overview 

On December 23, 2204, pro se plaintiff Mateo Jimenez, Jr., a pre-trial detainee 

at the W.C. “Dub” Brassell Adult Detention Center (“Detention Center”), filed this 

civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Doc. 2. Mr. Jimenez’s complaint alleges 

that Detention Center staff have failed to provide him adequate medical treatment 

for injuries that he sustained after falling in the Detention Center in August 2024. 

Mr. Jimenez names the Detention Center as the only Defendant and sues the 

Detention Center in both its individual and official capacity seeking monetary 

damages. 

As currently stated, Mr. Jimenez’s complaint fails to state a plausible 

constitutional claim for relief. However, rather than screen the complaint and 

recommend dismissal, the Court will postpone the screening process to give Mr. 

Case 4:24-cv-01126-BRW-ERE Document 4 Filed 12/27/24 Page 1 of 4
2 

Jimenez the opportunity to file an amended complaint clarifying his constitutional 

claims and correcting the deficiencies (or problems) in his current complaint.1

II. Complaint Deficiencies 

A. Personal Involvement 

Mr. Jiminez’s complaint fails to identify and name as a Defendant those 

individuals who personally violated his constitutional rights. “Liability under section 

1983 requires a causal link to, and direct responsibility for, the deprivation of rights.” 

See Clemmons v. Armontrout, 477 F.3d 962, 967 (8th Cir. 2007). 

B. Detention Center 

Mr. Jiminez names the Detention Center as the only Defendant. However, 

detention centers and county jails are not entities that can be sued in a civil rights 

case brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Day v. Minnehaha County, 632 Fed. Appx. 

305 (8th Cir. 2016) (per curiam) (citing Owens v. Scott County Jail, 328 F.3d 1026, 

1026 (8th Cir. 2003) (“county jails are not legal entities amendable to suit”)). 

Accordingly, Mr. Jimenez cannot proceed on his claims against the Detention 

1 Screening is mandated by the Prison Litigation Reform Act, which requires federal 

courts to screen prisoner complaints seeking relief against a governmental entity, officer, 

or employee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or a portion 

thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that: (a) are legally frivolous or malicious; (b) fail 

to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (c) seek monetary relief from a 

defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). When making this 

determination, the Court must accept the truth of the factual allegations contained in the 

complaint, and it may consider the documents attached to the complaint. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 

556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Reynolds v. Dormire, 636 F.3d 976, 979 (8th Cir. 2011).

Case 4:24-cv-01126-BRW-ERE Document 4 Filed 12/27/24 Page 2 of 4
3 

Center. Instead, he must identify the individuals who allegedly violated his 

constitutional rights. 

 III. Guidelines for Filing Amended Complaint

Mr. Jimenez has thirty days to file an amended complaint. If Mr. Jimenez files 

an amended complaint, he should: (1) specifically identify each individual who was 

deliberately indifferent to his medical needs; (2) explain how each named Defendant 

was aware of his need for medical treatment and failed to provide him that treatment; 

and (3) described how he was harmed or injured as a result of each Defendant’s 

alleged unconstitutional conduct. 

Mr. Jimenez’s amended complaint, if filed, will supersede or replace the 

current complaint. See In re Atlas Lines, Inc., 209 F.3d 1064, 1067 (8th Cir. 2000) 

(an amended complaint supersedes an original complaint and renders the original 

complaint without legal effect). So, Mr. Jimenez should make sure that his amended 

complaint includes all allegations relevant to the claim(s) he wants to pursue in this 

lawsuit. Also, Mr. Jimenez should not rely upon, or incorporate by reference, any 

allegations made in his original complaint. In other words, Mr. Jiminez’s amended 

complaint, if filed, will stand alone. 

Finally, in his amended complaint, Mr. Jimenez need only include a “short 

and plain statement” showing that he is entitled to relief, with factual allegations that 

are “simple, concise, and direct.” FED. R. CIV. P. 8(a)(1) & (d). At this early stage, 

Case 4:24-cv-01126-BRW-ERE Document 4 Filed 12/27/24 Page 3 of 4
4 

there is no need to identify witnesses or to describe evidence that he may rely on 

later to prove his claim. 

IV. Conclusion

For the reasons explained above, 

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 

 1. Mr. Jimenez may file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days of 

the entry of this Order. 

2. If Mr. Jimenez fails to file an amended complaint, the Court will screen 

the original complaint, which is likely to result in the dismissal of Mr. Jimenez’s 

claims. 

3. The Clerk is instructed to provide Mr. Jimenez a blank 42 U.S.C. § 

1983 complaint form, along with a copy of this Order. 

SO ORDERED 27 December 2024. 

 ____________________________________ 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 4:24-cv-01126-BRW-ERE Document 4 Filed 12/27/24 Page 4 of 4