United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Terre Haute Division
ENTRY SCREENING COMPLAINT AND DIRECTING FURTHER
William T. Lawrence, Judge
plaintiff is a prisoner currently incarcerated at Wabash
Valley Correctional Facility (“Wabash Valley”).
Because the plaintiff is a “prisoner” as defined
by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(h), this Court has an obligation
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) to screen his complaint
before service on the defendants. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915A(b), the Court must dismiss the complaint if it
is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief,
or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune
from such relief. In determining whether the complaint states
a claim, the Court applies the same standard as when
addressing a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(b)(6). See Lagerstrom v. Kingston, 463
F.3d 621, 624 (7th Cir. 2006). To survive dismissal,
[the] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to state a claim for relief that is
plausible on its face. A claim has facial plausibility when
the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to
draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable
for the misconduct alleged.
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Pro se
complaints such as that filed by the plaintiff are construed
liberally and held to a less stringent standard than formal
pleadings drafted by lawyers. Obriecht v. Raemisch,
517 F.3d 489, 491 n.2 (7th Cir. 2008).
Jeffrey McCloud filed this civil action alleging that the
defendants have been deliberately indifferent to his serious
medical needs. McCloud alleges that in 2005 he first injured
his left hand when his arm went through a glass window
causing tendon and nerve damage. In 2013, he was prescribed
physical therapy and pain management. McCloud's pain
continued through January 17, 2015, when he was assaulted and
stabbed five times in his left shoulder and arm at Wabash
January 20, 2015, and August 14, 2015, McCloud was
treated/evaluated six times by Dr. Byrd. Each time McCloud
complained of his continuing pain.
response to multiple health care request forms seeking
“MDSC” between September-October 2015, and
January-February 2016, defendant Nurse R. Riggs directed
McCloud to be seen at his chronic care appointment and
refused to schedule McCloud to see a doctor.
alleges that he has not been prescribed meaningful treatment
for his left arm pain. He seeks compensatory and punitive
damages, as well as, “appropriate treatment to correct
or repair the damage that is causing the degeneration of the
plaintiff's left hand.” Dkt. 2 at p. 7.
damages suit under § 1983 requires that a defendant be
personally involved in the alleged constitutional
deprivation.” Matz v. Klotka, 769 F.3d 517,
528 (7th Cir. 2014); see Minix v.
Canarecci, 597 F.3d 824, 833 (7th Cir. 2010)
(“[I]ndividual liability under § 1983 requires
‘personal involvement in the alleged constitutional
deprivation.'”) (citation and quotation marks
omitted). Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994). A
claim based on deficient medical care must demonstrate two
requirements: 1) an objectively serious medical condition,
and 2) an official's deliberate indifference to that
condition. The second requirement is a subjective one:
a prison official cannot be found liable under the Eighth
Amendment for denying an inmate humane conditions of
confinement unless the official knows of and disregards an
excessive risk to inmate health or safety; the official must
both be aware of facts from which the inference could be
drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm exists, and he
must also draw the inference.
Farmer, 114 S.Ct. at 1979. Prison officials may
exhibit deliberate indifference to a known condition through
inaction, Gayton v. McCoy, 593 F.3d 610, 623-24 (7th
Cir. 2010); Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Serv.,
577 F.3d 816, 832 (7th Cir. 2009), or by persisting with
inappropriate treatment, Gonzalez v. Feinerman, 663
F.3d 311, 314 (7th Cir.2011); Greeno v. Daley, 414
F.3d 645, 653-54 (7th Cir. 2005). Prison officials might also
show their deliberate indifference by delaying necessary
treatment and thus ...