United States District Court, E.D. California
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING
DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [ECF NO.
Anthony Hoskins is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in
this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
before the Court is Defendants' motion for summary
judgment, filed March 29, 2019.
action is proceeding against Defendants Nguyen and Baniga for
deliberate indifference to a serious medical need in
violation of the Eighth Amendment.
January 25, 2018, Defendants filed an answer to the
complaint. On February 1, 2018, the Court issued the
discovery and scheduling order setting, among other things,
the deadline to amend the pleadings for August 1, 2018. (ECF
April 9, 2018, the Court granted Defendants' request to
extend the deadline to file an exhaustion related motion for
summary judgment to August 1, 2018. (ECF No. 18.) However,
all other deadlines remained in full force and effect.
September 21, 2018, the Court granted Defendants' second
request to modify the scheduling order and extended the
deadlines to complete discovery and file a dispositive motion
to February 1, 2019 and April 1, 2019, respectively. (ECF No.
February 27, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion to amend the
complaint, along with a proposed second amended complaint
which was lodged. (ECF Nos. 22, 23.) Defendants filed an
opposition on March 5, 2019, and Plaintiff did not file a
reply. On March 26, 2019, the undersigned issued Findings and
Recommendations recommending that Plaintiff's motion to
amend the complaint be denied. (ECF No. 25.) The Findings and
Recommendations were adopted in full on June 5, 2019, and
Plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint was denied.
(ECF No. 30.)
previously stated, on March 29, 2019, Defendants filed a
motion for summary judgment.(ECF No. 26.) Plaintiff did not
file an opposition and the time to do has passed.
Accordingly, Defendants' motion for summary judgment is
deemed submitted without oral argument. Local Rule 230(1).
party may move for summary judgment, and the Court shall
grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no
genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a)
(quotation marks omitted); Washington Mut. Inc. v.
U.S., 636 F.3d 1207, 1216 (9th Cir. 2011). Each
party's position, whether it be that a fact is disputed
or undisputed, must be supported by (1) citing to particular
parts of materials in the record, including but not limited
to depositions, documents, declarations, or discovery; or (2)
showing that the materials cited do not establish the
presence or absence of a genuine dispute or that the opposing
party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(1) (quotation marks omitted). The Court
may consider other materials in the record not cited to by
the parties, but it is not required to do so. Fed.R.Civ.P.
56(c)(3); Carmen v. San Francisco Unified Sch.
Dist., 237 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th Cir. 2001); accord
Simmons v. Navajo Cnty., Ariz., 609 F.3d 1011, 1017 (9th
judging the evidence at the summary judgment stage, the Court
does not make credibility determinations or weigh conflicting
evidence, Soremekun, 509 F.3d at 984 (quotation
marks and citation omitted), and it must draw all inferences
in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and
determine whether a genuine issue of material fact precludes
entry of judgment, Comite de Jornaleros de Redondo Beach
v. City of Redondo Beach, 657 F.3d at 942 (quotation
marks and citation omitted).
Summary of Plaintiff's Complaint
2007, Plaintiff developed cystic acne. Plaintiff did not see
a dermatologist for two years which caused his skin disease
to degenerate so severely that he now suffers from the
shingles virus. Plaintiff was also never provided pain
medication for his chronic pain. Prison officials advised
Plaintiff that his shingles was directly related to his skin
disease, and a sign of stress from his pain rashes, swelling,
keloids, open sores and sleep deprivation.
April 13, 2017, Plaintiff met with Dr. Nguyen who advised him
that he reviewed all of inmate appeals and medical records,
and Plaintiff expressed having chronic pain symptoms and that
he had been waiting two years to see a dermatologist.
Plaintiff described that he had abscesses all of his body
which lead to chronic pain. Plaintiff requested pain
medication, other than Ibuprofen, which was denied.
also requested to be placed back on Doxycycline which helped
alleviate the cystic acne, but the request was denied by Dr.
Nguyen. Dr. Nguyen also denied Plaintiff's request for a
special diet because the milk and fluids in his body would
turn into point and exit his pores.
Statement of Undisputed Facts
Plaintiff Hoskins is an inmate with the California Department
of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), currently housed at
Kern Valley State Prison. (ECF No. 22 at 1.)
Plaintiff Hoskins who has no formal medical training,
believes that a higher dosage of doxycycline to treat cystic
acne was indicated. (Pl. Dep. at 53:16-17; 54:6-55:25,
attached to Hernandez Decl. Ex. A.)
Plaintiff Hoskins suffers from cystic acne and shingles, both
which cannot be cured, but are managed conditions. Plaintiff
Hoskins developed cystic acne around 2007 or 2008. (Nguyen
Decl. ¶ 7; Pl. Dep. at 10:5-7, 10:23-11:2.)
Prior to arriving at California Correctional
Institution-Tehachapi (CCI), Plaintiff developed keloids on
his face. (Nguyen Decl. ¶ 6.)
Plaintiff's sole cause of action for deliberate
indifference arises from care provided by Dr. Nguyen, and
supervision of Dr. Baniga, while Plaintiff was housed at CCI
only. (Pl. Dep. at 9:10-10:4.)
Plaintiff was housed at CCI from February 24, 2017 through
the date of filing the amended complaint on October 10, 2017.
(ECF 10 at 2; Nguyen Decl. ¶ 6.)
Plaintiff named Dr. Baniga as a Defendant as Dr. Baniga
supervised Dr. Nguyen. (Pl. Dep. at 44:25-45, 46:2.)
Baniga did not meet, examine or provide treatment to
Plaintiff. (Baniga Decl. ¶ 4; Pl. Dep. at 44:25-45:12.)
May 1, 2017, Dr. Baniga reviewed a Health Care Appeal filed
by Plaintiff on April 4, 2017. (Baniga Decl. ¶ 5.)
Upon his review of the treatment provided by Dr. Nguyen, Dr.
Baniga did not have any criticism of the treatment rendered
or treatment plan set out by Dr. Nguyen. (Baniga Decl. ¶
Plaintiff arrived at CCI on February 23, 2017. (Nguyen Decl.
Prior to Plaintiff's first medical appointment with Dr.
Nguyen, Dr. Nguyen reviewed medical records and medical
appeals to familiarize and understand his new patient's
medical history. (Nguyen Decl. ¶ 6.)
Nguyen determined Plaintiff had been diagnosed with cystic
acne, which some had developed to keloids, prior to arrival
at CCI. (Nguyen Decl. ¶ 6.)
Plaintiff had been prescribed Doxycycline, Amoxicillin,
Bactrim, topicals Clindamycin and Chlorhexidine, for acne,
all to various effectiveness, within the previous 6 months of
his arrival at CCI. (Nguyen Decl. ¶ 6.)
Plaintiff had also been referred to a dermatology examination
which had not yet taken place. (Nguyen Decl. ¶ 6.)
Plaintiff had also been diagnosed with shingles, treated with
Acyclovir and Calamine topical. (Nguyen Decl. ¶ 6.)
Plaintiff suffers from cystic acne, an incurable skin
condition. (Nguyen Decl. ¶ 7 & Ex. A.)
Plaintiff reported to Dr. Nguyen that he had suffered from
cystic acne since about 2007. (Nguyen Decl. ¶ 7 &
Acne is a disorder that affects the skin's oil glands and
hair follicles. It is one of the most common dermatological
conditions. The small holes in the skin (pores) connect to
oil glands under the skin. These ...