United States District Court, D. Connecticut
INITIAL REVIEW ORDER
MICHAEL P. SHEA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Jayevon Blaine (“Blaine”), incarcerated at the
Osborn Correctional Institution in Somers, Connecticut, filed
this case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He contends that the
defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious
medical needs by denying and delaying surgery to address
gynecomastia, growth of female breast tissue caused by
Risperdal, and by failing to warn him and his physician about
this side-effect. Blaine seeks damages and injunctive relief.
Court 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. This requirement
applies to all prisoner filings regardless whether the
prisoner pays the filing fee. Nicholson v.
Lenczewski, 356 F.Supp.2d 157, 159 (D. Conn. 2005)
(citing Carr v. Dvorin, 171 F.3d 115 (2d Cir. 1999)
(per curiam)). Here, the plaintiff is proceeding in forma
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 plausible 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. “A claim has facial plausibility when a 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) (internal quotation marks and citations
omitted). The Court must construe pro se pleadings
liberally, Harris v. Mills, 572 F.3d 66, 72 (2d Cir.
2009), and interpret them to raise the “strongest
arguments that they suggest.” Triestman v. Fed.
Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 472 (2d Cir. 2006). To
plead a cognizable legal claim, however, a pro se
plaintiff must meet the standard of facial plausibility.
See Hogan v. Fischer, 738 F.3d 509, 515 (2d Cir.
2013) (“[A] pro se complaint must state a
plausible claim for relief.”) (citing Harris v.
Mills, 572 F.3d 66, 73 (2d Cir. 2009)).
Semple contracted with the University of Connecticut
Correctional Managed Health Care (“CMHC”) to
provide health care to Connecticut inmates. The contract, no
longer in effect, provided no oversight for CMHC staff and no
accountability for the $100, 000, 000 yearly fee. ECF No. 1,
¶ 11. Under the contract, the Department of Correction
assumed all liability for lawsuits against CMHC employees.
Id. After increasing concern over medical treatment
afforded to Connecticut inmates, including several inmate
deaths, the contract was terminated. Id. In July
2017, the Department of Correction re-assumed responsibility
for inmate health services. Id.
Pharmaceuticals, as the maker of Risperdal, is responsible
for providing warnings and packaging for the product.
Id., ¶ 12. The packaging on Risperdal provided
to inmates contains no patient information or warnings.
Burnes prescribed Risperdal to Blaine to treat ADHD, anger,
anxiety, depression, and bipolar disorder from September 8,
2015, through February 5, 2016, while he was confined at
Garner Correctional Institution. Id., ¶ 13.
Defendant Burnes never warned Blaine of the risks and
benefits of Risperdal. Id.
July 5, 2018, Blaine noticed changes to his chest.
Id., ¶ 14. He informed medical and mental
health staff. Id. Blaine was diagnosed as suffering
from gynecomastia and is awaiting surgery. Id.
names six defendants, APRN J. Burnes, former Commissioner
Scott Semple, Commissioner Rollin Cook, Jannssen
Pharmaceuticals, and Jannssen Pharmaceuticals employees
Michelle Bufano, John Winter, and Elizabeth Laxto Smithhart.
Blaine states that he has named defendant Burnes in his or
her individual and official capacity. He does not indicate
the capacity in which he names any other defendant.
does not indicate whether he was a pretrial detainee or a
sentenced inmate at the time of the incident underlying the
complaint. The Court may take judicial notice of state court
records. See Mangiafico v. Blumenthal, 471 F.3d 391,
398 (2d Cir.2006) (“docket sheets are public records of
which the court could take judicial notice”);
Shmueli v. City of New York, 424 F.3d 231, 233 (2d
Cir. 2005) (court may take judicial notice of matters of
public records, such as state prosecution of an individual).
The Connecticut Judicial Branch website shows that, on
February 21, 2014, Blaine was sentenced to a term of
imprisonment of fifteen years for a 2012 charge of conspiracy
to commit robbery in the first degree with a deadly weapon.
See Case No. FBT-CR-12-0269040-T (Conn. Super. Ct.),
(last visited Feb. 25, 2019). Thus, Blaine was a sentenced
inmate during the time relevant to this action.
alleges that all defendants disregarded an excessive risk to
his health and subjected him to gynecomastia by failing to
provide patient information about Risperdal, id.,
¶ 16; defendant Semple failed to provide proper mental
health care by failing to oversee CMHC, id., ¶
17; defendant Jannssen Pharmaceuticals violated his
constitutional rights by failing to provide adequate patient
information regarding side-effects on packaging provided to
prisoners, id., ¶ 18; the defendants failed to
implement procedures to ensure conformity with acceptable
professional and community standards regarding provision of
medication within correctional facilities, id.,
¶ 18; and the defendants denied Blaine proper
medical care by failing to provide immediate surgery,
id., ¶ 19.
Defendants Jannssen Pharmaceuticals, Bufano, ...