The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDING ACTION PROCEED ON EIGHTH AMENDMENT CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANTS COLEMAN AND FORTUNE AND RECOMMENDING REMAINING CLAIMS AND PARTIES BE DISMISSED (ECF No. 12) FOURTEEN DAY OBJECTION DEADLINE
Plaintiff Billy Ray Sha'Nee Maldonado ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. No other parties have appeared Plaintiff initiated this action on April 27, 2012. (ECF No. 1.) The Court dismissed, with leave to amend, Plaintiff's initial Complaint for failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 9.) Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint, which the Court also dismissed for failure to state a claim, but again gave leave to amend. (ECF Nos. 10 & 11.) Plaintiff has filed a Second Amended Complaint. (Am. Compl., ECF No. 12.) Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint is now before the Court for screening.
The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally "frivolous or malicious," that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). "Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
A complaint must contain "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief . . . ." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, ____ U.S. ____, ____, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff must set forth "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim that is plausible on its face.'" Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. at 1949 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). Facial plausibility demands more than the mere possibility that a defendant committed misconduct and, while factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Id. at 1949-50.
Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at Pleasant Valley State Prison ("PVSP"), where the alleged events giving rise to this claim occurred. Plaintiff names the following individuals as defendants: 1) N. Greene, Correctional Officer at PVSP, 2) Doctor Coleman, physician's assistant at PVSP, and 3) Doctor Junior Fortune, physician's assistant at PVSP.
His allegations are as follows:
When Plaintiff was transferred to PVSP in 2006, he had a "urinary health condition" that required treatment. (Am. Compl. at 3.) Defendant Coleman saw Plaintiff for this condition on July 16, 2008 and prescribed terazosin, which was not effective. (Id.) Plaintiff saw Defendant Coleman again on September 5, 2008, and told him that the medication had been ineffective. (Id.) Defendant Coleman, without examining Plaintiff, prescribed the same medication. (Id.) On August 26, 2011, Plaintiff saw Defendant Fortune who also failed to examine Plaintiff, told him to continue taking terazosin, and refused to give Plaintiff pain medication. (Id. at 4.) Plaintiff continues to suffer from this condition. (Id. at 3.)
On November 4, 2011, Defendant Greene asked Plaintiff to provide a urine sample. (Am. Compl. at 4.) When Plaintiff was unable to do so because of his condition, Defendant Greene gave him a disciplinary CDC 115 for failing to urinate. (Id.) Plaintiff lost certain privileges as a result of the disciplinary report. (Id.)
Plaintiff asks for $1,700,000 in compensatory and punitive damages. (Am. Compl. at 3.)
Section 1983 "provides a cause of action for the 'deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws' of the United States." Wilder v. Virginia Hosp. Ass'n, 496 U.S. 498, 508 (1990) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 1983). Section 1983 is not itself a source of substantive rights, but merely provides a method for ...