United States District Court, D. Connecticut
REVIEW OF AMENDED COMPLAINT (DE#14)
Kari
A. Dooley United States District Judge
On
February 26, 2019, the Plaintiff, Da-Quane Adams, a prisoner
currently confined at the MacDougall-Walker Correctional
Institution (“MWCI”) in Suffield, Connecticut,
brought a civil action pro se under 42 U.S.C. §
1983 against the State of Connecticut[1] and three Connecticut
Department of Correction (“DOC”) medical
officials: Dr. Omprakash Pillai, Dr. Syed Naqvi, and Nurse
Shanya G. Compl. (DE#1). The Plaintiff claimed that the
officials violated his Eighth Amendment protection against
cruel and unusual punishment by acting with deliberate
indifference to his serious medical needs. Id. at
p.16. This Court issued its Initial Review Order on March 18,
2019 dismissing the claims against Dr. Naqvi and Shayna G. as
time-barred and the claim against Dr. Pillai as factually
insufficient under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Initial Review
Order (DE#8) 7-8. The Court granted the Plaintiff one
opportunity to amend his claim against Dr. Pillai to satisfy
the Eighth Amendment standard for a showing of deliberate
indifference to medical needs. Id. at 8.
The
court does not herein repeat the standard of review or
applicable law set forth in the Initial Review Order dated
March 18, 2019. In reviewing the Amended Complaint, the court
finds that the plaintiff has plausibly alleged a deliberate
indifference to medical needs claim under the Eighth
Amendment against Dr. Pillai. Accordingly, the court orders
as follows:
Orders
(1) The
Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference to serious
medical needs, as stated in the Amended Complaint, may
proceed against the Defendant, Dr. Omprakash Pillai, in his
individual capacity for damages and in his official capacity
for injunctive relief.
(2) The
clerk shall prepare a summons form and send an official
capacity service packet, including the Amended Complaint
(DE#14), to the United States Marshal Service. The U.S.
Marshal is directed to effect service of the Amended
Complaint on the Defendant in his official capacity at the
Office of the Attorney General, 55 Elm Street, Hartford, CT
06141, within twenty-one (21) days from the
date of this Order and file a return of service within
thirty (30) days from the date of this
Order.
(3) The
clerk shall verify the current work address for the Defendant
with the DOC Office of Legal Affairs, mail a waiver of
service of process request packet containing the Amended
Complaint to him at the confirmed address within
twenty-one (21) days of this Order, and
report on the status of the waiver request on the
thirty-fifth (35) day after mailing. If the
Defendant fails to return the waiver request, the clerk shall
make arrangements for in-person service by the U.S. Marshals
Service on him, and he shall be required to pay the costs of
such service in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 4(d).
(4) The
clerk shall mail a courtesy copy of the Amended Complaint and
this Order to the DOC Office of Legal Affairs.
(5) The
Defendant shall file his response to the Amended Complaint,
either an answer or motion to dismiss, within sixty
(60) days from the date the notice of lawsuit and
waiver of service of summons forms are mailed to him. If he
chooses to file an answer, he shall admit or deny the
allegations and respond to the cognizable claim recited
above. He may also include any and all additional defenses
permitted by the Federal Rules.
(6)
Discovery, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26-37, shall be completed
within six months (180 days) from the date
of this Order. Discovery requests need not be filed with the
Court.
(7) The
parties must comply with the District of Connecticut
“Standing Order Re: Initial Discovery Disclosures,
” which the clerk is directed to docket separately.
(8) All
motions for summary judgment shall be filed within
seven months (210 days) from the date of
this Order.
(9)
Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7(a), a nonmoving party must
respond to a dispositive motion within twenty-one (21) days
of the date the motion was filed. If no response is filed, or
the response is not timely, the dispositive motion can be
granted absent objection.
(10) If
the Plaintiff changes his address at any time during the
litigation of this case, Local Court Rule 83.1(c)2 provides
that he MUST notify the court. Failure to do so can result in
the dismissal of the case. The Plaintiff must give notice of
a new address even if he is incarcerated. He should write
“PLEASE NOTE MY NEW ADDRESS” on the notice. It ...