Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Wilson v. J. Gastello

United States District Court, C.D. California, Western Division

April 10, 2017

J. GASTELLO et al., Defendants.



         I. BACKGROUND

         On November 15, 2016, Michael Wilson (“Plaintiff”), a prisoner at California Men's Colony in San Luis Obispo County (“CMC”), filed an “Affidavit/Declaration” in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Dkt. 1 (“Affidavit”). The Clerk of the Court provided Plaintiff with a blank Complaint by a Prisoner Form and a blank In Forma Pauperis Application. Dkt. 2, 3. On December 1, Plaintiff filed this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Dkt. 5 (“Complaint”), 6. About three weeks later, the action was transferred to the Central District of California, because the Complaint described events that occurred at CMC. See Dkt. 9. On January 5, 2017, this Court granted Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis. Dkt. 12. On March 6, Plaintiff moved to amend the Complaint, adding additional allegations. Dkt. 14 (“Supplement”). The Court interpreted Plaintiff's motion as a request to supplement the Complaint (Dkt. 17); the Court considers the Complaint and Supplement together.

         In accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A, the Court must screen the Complaint to determine whether the action is frivolous or malicious; fails to state a claim on which relief might be granted; or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.


         Construing Plaintiff's pleadings generously, Plaintiff brings the Complaint against at least 13 defendants: (1) J. Gastello, CMC Warden; (2) Scott Kernan, Secretary of Corrections; (3) L. Sprague, Chief Medical Officer at CMC; (4) Ojuri Adebambo, M.D.; (5) Camilo (referred to by Plaintiff as “Castillo”) Guiang, primary care provider; (6) Mrs. Romans, Educational Principle; (7) Ms. Gomez, Vice Principal; (8) Ms. Knapp, Teacher; (9); M. Kon, Compliance/Appeals Coordinator; (10) K. Lino, Custody Appeals Coordinator; (11) R. Ochoa, Custody Appeals Analyst; (12) K. Cox, ACA Coordinator; and (13) S. Aguilera, primary care provider. Complaint at 2; Supplement at 2. Plaintiff may also seek to bring claims against (14) Ms. Mayton, Testing Coordinator; (15) Dr. Chaffee, optometrist; (16) Esther Fernandez, Nurse; (17) Benjamin Allen, Nurse; and (18) Brad T. Barcklay, “Psy. D.” Complaint at 7; Supplement at 5-6, 8. Plaintiff does not state whether he brings his claims against the defendants in an official or individual capacity, or both. The Court therefore assumes that Plaintiff asserts his claims against the defendants in their individual capacity only.


         Plaintiff is a “victim of an Organized Crime Ring and is unwilling to be . . . silenced . . . [by] criminals posturing as Doctors, Nurses, Surgeons, Appeals Coordinators.” Complaint at 4. Plaintiff has “literally been tortured for over a decade.” Supplement at 4. “[O]fficials, doctors, nurses, wardens, [and] associate wardens are all . . . colluding together to deny care . . . Plaintiff has ‘grounds' of these officials perpetrating fraud, altering medical records, selling/peddling junk prescription glasses, old lenses, defective frames and creating all these medical issues by feeding prisoners … food without any nutritional value creating diabetes, high cholesterol, heart attacks, strokes.” Id. CMC “medical staff” refuse referrals if prisoners do not volunteer to take experimental drugs. Id.

         Plaintiff was left with a scar on his colon after a colonoscopy procedure at CMC. Complaint at 4. Gastello signed off, Dr. Guiang insisted on, and Dr. Adebambo performed the procedure. Id. at 4, 6. On November 8, 2014 at 10:00 a.m., Nurse Fernandez, Nurse Allen, and Dr. Adebambo “stated a new procedure would be done where air is blown in the colon, ” placed Plaintiff in a fetal position on a table, and pulled his pants down around his buttocks. Supplement at 6. The colonoscopy left Plaintiff with constant bloating, inability to pass gas, defecation six times a day, hemorrhoids, diverticulosis, weight loss, and irritable bowel syndrome. Complaint at 5-6. Sprague refuses to let Plaintiff see a specialist. Id. at 5; Supplement at 7. Plaintiff always runs out of toilet paper, but “medical” refuses to issue more and Plaintiff has to pay for his toilet paper supplies. Supplement at 6. Plaintiff was granted a high fiber diet, but was instead given fiber tablets. Complaint at 6; Supplement at 4.

         Plaintiff was “hit on the side line of a football game, ” which flattened a curve in his spine. Complaint at 5. He also has a large goiter growing on his sternum, which impedes his breathing. Id. “CMC” claims that x-ray results are negative, yet other x-rays show a “possible calcified Lymph Node” and that part of Plaintiff's rib cage is missing. Id. Plaintiff's x-ray results were “fraudulent.” Id. at 4. Plaintiff was scheduled to have a large calcium stone removed from his salivary gland, but the surgery has not yet occurred. Id. at 5. Plaintiff suffers from severe degenerative disc disease, arthritis, and constant pain. Id. at 3, 5.

         Dr. Chaffee gave Plaintiff “defective, old lenses, ” despite knowing that Plaintiff has glaucoma and chronic dry eye. Supplement at 5. Dr. Chaffee has refused to replace these lenses or renew Plaintiff's glaucoma medication.[1] Id.

         “Medical staff” hides Plaintiff's medical file in “numerous windows” on the computer. Id. at 7.

         Plaintiff's saliva is white with bubbles, clogging his throat, and he was diagnosed with “seratia marcesin.” Id. Plaintiff asked Dr. Guiang for a saliva test, but Dr. Guiang said that Sprague had not authorized it. Id. “CMC” refused follow-up. Id. Plaintiff asked for his lungs to be checked due to breathing problems; “test[s] were performed, ” but Dr. Guiang and Sprague “embellished” the results. Id.

         Sprague acted with deliberate indifference to Plaintiff's injuries. Id. at 5. Kernan is generally responsible for Plaintiff's custody and care. Id. at 4. Sprague, Kon, Lino, Ochoa, Cox, Dr. Aguilera, and Dr. Guiang are part of a Reasonable Accommodation Panel “involved in the deprivation of medical care.” Supplement at 2. Gastello and Kernan have ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.