Thomas-El v. Hancock

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION
DEANGELO THOMAS-EL, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
v. 	) 	No. 1:25-cv-00176-RHH
)
GREGORY HANCOCK, 	)
)
Defendant. 	)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon review of Plaintiff DeAngelo Thomas El’s pro se
Complaint. [ECF No. 1]. The complaint is defective because it was not signed by Plaintiff and not
drafted on the Court’s form. See E.D. Mo. Local Rule 2.06(A). Additionally, Plaintiff must either
pay the filing fee or file a Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis.1 See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). If he
chooses to seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis, Plaintiff must also file a copy of his certified
account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of the Complaint.
The Complaint
Plaintiff DeAngelo Thomas-El, a prisoner at Southeast Correctional Center (SECC), filed
a handwritten document on October 20, 2025, titled, “Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.” [ECF 1]. However, a review of the document reveals that Plaintiff
1 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner may not proceed in forma pauperis if he has, on three or more
prior occasions, brought an action or appeal that was dismissed on the grounds that it was frivolous,
malicious or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prison is under imminent
danger of serious physical injury. It appears that Plaintiff has previously had three prior cases dismissed for
one of the reasons set forth in § 1915(g). See Thomas-El v. Alfero, et al., No. 4:20-cv-00409-PLC (E.D.
Mo. Mar. 17, 2020); Thomas-El v. Precythe, et al., No. 2:19-cv-00049-SPM (E.D. Mo. Jun. 24, 2019); and
Thomas-El v. Meyer, No. 4:21-cv-00992-SRC (E.D.Mo. Feb. 17, 2022). As such, even if Plaintiff files a
Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis, it is likely his Motion will be denied based on § 1915(g).
Case: 1:25-cv-00176-RHH Doc. #: 2 Filed: 11/06/25 Page: 1 of 4 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
is seeking to challenge the circumstances of his confinement rather than the validity2 of his
confinement. Therefore, the Court will require Plaintiff to amend his Complaint on a Prisoner Civil
Rights Complaint Form.
Plaintiff states that Officer Colby Muller gave him a conduct violation on January 10, 2025,
when Muller was picking up food trays and Plaintiff refused to allow his food port to be closed.
Plaintiff asserts that his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment were violated on
January 16, 2025, by SECC Case Manager Melanie Boyer, when she found him guilty of
disobeying a direct order from Muller. Plaintiff seeks an order from the Court dismissing the
conduct violation in question. These claims are more appropriately addressed in a § 1983 action.
Thus, Plaintiff should amend his Complaint on a § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint Form.
Instructions for Amending the Complaint
Plaintiff has 21 days from the date of this Order to file an Amended Complaint on the
Court’s form in accordance with the specific instructions set forth here. All claims in the action
must be included in one, centralized Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a).
Additionally, Plaintiff is warned that the filing of his Amended Complaint replaces the
original Complaint, so Plaintiff must include each of the claims he wishes to pursue in the
Amended Complaint. See, e.g., In re Wireless Telephone Federal Cost Recovery Fees Litigation,
396 F.3d 922, 928 (8th Cir. 2005). Any claims from the original Complaint that are not included
in the Amended Complaint will be deemed abandoned and will not be considered. Id. The
allegations in the Amended Complaint must show how each named Defendant is directly
responsible for the alleged harms. If Plaintiff wishes to sue Defendants in their individual
2 Matters relating to the validity of confinement, or affecting the duration of confinement, are appropriately
addressed within the province of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S.
475, 500 (1973).
Case: 1:25-cv-00176-RHH Doc. #: 2 Filed: 11/06/25 Page: 2 of 4 PageID #:
<pageID>

3
capacities, Plaintiff must specifically say so in the Amended Complaint. If Plaintiff fails to sue
Defendants in their individual capacities, this action may be subject to dismissal.
All of Plaintiff’s claims should be clearly set forth in the “Statement of Claim.” If Plaintiff
fails to file an Amended Complaint on the Court’s form within 21 days and in compliance with
the Court’s instructions, the Court will dismiss this action without prejudice and without further
notice.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to mail to Plaintiff a copy of the
Court’s Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint form and Application to Proceed in District Court without
Prepaying Fees or Costs form.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff must file an Amended Complaint, in
accordance with the instructions set forth above, on the Court’s form within 21 days of the date of
this Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff must either pay the full filing fee or submit
Application to Proceed in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs form within 21 days of
the date of this Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if Plaintiff chooses to submit Application to Proceed
in District Court without Prepaying Fees or Costs form and Plaintiff maintains a prison account at
SECC, he shall file a certified copy of his prison account statement for the six-month period
immediately preceding the filing of the complaint, within 21 days of the date of this Order.
Case: 1:25-cv-00176-RHH Doc. #: 2 Filed: 11/06/25 Page: 3 of 4 PageID #:
<pageID>

4
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that if Plaintiff fails to comply with this Order, the Court
will dismiss this action without prejudice and without further notice.
Dated this 6th day of November, 2025.
RODNEY H. HOLMES
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case: 1:25-cv-00176-RHH Doc. #: 2 Filed: 11/06/25 Page: 4 of 4 PageID #:
<pageID>