United States District Court, D. Connecticut
INITIAL REVIEW ORDER
R. Underhill United States District Judge
Artis is incarcerated at MacDougall Correctional Institution
(“MacDougall”). He has filed a civil rights
action, pro se, naming Ms. Nancy, Mr. Rodriguez, Ms.
Lightner, Ms. Heidi Green, Mr. Pillai and Mr. Rosenberg as
defendants. For the reasons set forth below, the complaint is
section 1915A of Title 28 of the United States Code, I must
review prisoner civil complaints and dismiss any portion of
the complaint that is frivolous or malicious, that fails to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seeks
monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Rule 8 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a complaint
contain “a short and plain statement of the claim
showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.”
detailed allegations are not required, the complaint must
include sufficient facts to afford the defendants fair notice
of the claims and the grounds upon which they are based and
to demonstrate a right to relief. Bell Atlantic v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555-56 (2007). Conclusory
allegations are not sufficient. Ashcroft v. Iqbal,
556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). The plaintiff must plead
“enough facts to state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at
570. Nevertheless, it is well-established that
“[p]ro se complaints ‘must be
construed liberally and interpreted to raise the strongest
arguments that they suggest.'” Sykes v. Bank of
Am., 723 F.3d 399, 403 (2d Cir. 2013) (quoting
Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471,
474 (2d Cir. 2006)); see also Tracy v. Freshwater,
623 F.3d 90, 101-02 (2d Cir. 2010) (discussing special rules
of solicitude for pro se litigants).
alleges that, on April 11, 2016, he received a notification
of test results from a nurse at Enfield Correctional
Institution. On July 7, 2016, he sought treatment in the
Enfield medical unit for a tingling sensation in his left
arm, elbow and upper shoulder due to inflammation caused by
officials transferred Artis to MacDougall at some point on
July 7, 2016. After his arrival at MacDougall, he sent a
written request to Ms. Green to find out why he had been
transferred to MacDougall. On July 8, 2016, the plaintiff
filed a health service review seeking treatment for shoulder
pain. A medical provider denied his request for treatment.
11, 2016, prison officials at MacDougall posted a notice
regarding the side effects of nonsteroidal, anti-inflammatory
drugs. Artis sent a “Legal Notice of Suit” to Ms.
Lightner, but she did not respond to the notice. On July 27,
2016, Artis filed a request for health service seeking
treatment for his shoulder pain.
August 4, 2016, Artis sought treatment for side effects of
Naproxen, a medication that a medical provider had prescribed
for him. On August 11, 2016, Artis sent a “Legal
Affidavit” Ms. Lightner regarding a violation of
Administrative Directive 8.1, Scope of Health Service Care.
plaintiff filed grievances on July 8, 2016, and July 28,
2016, seeking medical treatment. He did not receive responses
to the grievances. On August 25, 2016, he filed an appeal
seeking written responses to the grievances. A copy of the
appeal is attached to the complaint. Although Artis makes
reference to various exhibits, no other exhibits are attached
to the complaint.
Official Capacity Claims
relief, Artis requests compensatory and punitive damages. To
the extent that Artis seeks damages from the defendants in
their official capacities, the claims are barred by the
Eleventh Amendment. See Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S.
159 (1985); Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332, 342
(1979). Those claims are dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
Defendants Nancy, Rodriguez, Pillai and Rosenberg
identifies Ms. Nancy as the Medical Records Secretary at
Enfield, and Mr. Rodriguez as the Deputy Warden of Operations
and Medical at Enfield. Mr. Pillai is identified as a
physician at MacDougall, and Mr. Rosenberg is identified as a
nurse at Enfield. Artis lists those defendants in the
description of the parties on page two of the complaint, but
does not otherwise mention them in the body of the complaint.
has not asserted facts to suggest that any of those
defendants was deliberately indifferent to his medical needs
or otherwise violated his federally or constitutionally
protected rights. All claims against defendants Nancy,
Rodriguez, Pillai and ...