All Courts |
Federal Courts |
US Court of Appeals Cases |
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit |
2014-02 |
-
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Submitted February 21, 2014* Decided February 21, 2014 Before RICHARD D. CUDAHY, Circuit Judge FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge No. 13-1884 MATTHEW H. WOJTASZEK, Appeal from the United States Plaintiff-Appellant, District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. v. No. 13 C 1687 THOMAS DART, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Matthew F. Kennelly, Judge. ORDER Matthew Wojtaszek brought this suit under
42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming that jail officials were deliberately indifferent to his complaints about the prison’s infrequent * The appellees were not served with process in the district court and are not participating in this appeal. After examining the appellant’s brief and the record, we have concluded that the case is appropriate for summary disposition. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the appellant’s brief and the record. See FED. R. APP. P. 34(a)(2)(C). No. 13-1884 Page 2 laundry service. The district court dismissed the complaint at screening. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). We affirm. Wojtaszek alleged that while he was a pretrial detainee at Cook County Jail, his bedding was exchanged only one or two times per month, laundry service was available even less so, and he once went seven weeks without laundry service for his uniform (and was not allowed to wash it himself). In dismissing the complaint for failure to state a claim, the district court concluded that the laundry service Wojtaszek described was not objectively serious because it did not deny him the “minimal civilized measures of life’s necessities.” On appeal Wojtaszek asserts that the district court wrongly dismissed his complaint because the prison’s limited laundry service creates an unconstitutional condition of confinement. But as the district court explained, infrequent laundry service alone is not an objectively serious condition that violates the constitution. See Martin v. Tyson,
845 F.2d 1451, 1457 (7th Cir. 1988) (lack of pillow and cleaning supplies, and infrequent laundry services not unconstitutional); Gates v. Cook,
376 F.3d 323, 342 (5th Cir. 2004). Wojtaszek incurred one “strike” for filing his complaint and incurs another for this appeal. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Hains v. Washington,
131 F.3d 1248, 1250 (7th Cir. 1997). AFFIRMED.
Document Info
Docket Number: 13-1884
Citation Numbers: 555 F. App'x 628
Judges: PerCuriam
Filed Date: 2/21/2014
Precedential Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 11/6/2024