United States District Court, D. Arizona
Robert F. Lindley, Jr., Plaintiff,
Corizon Health, et al., Defendants.
G. Campbell Senior United States District Judge.
Robert F. Lindley, Jr., who is confined in the Arizona State
Prison Complex-Lewis, has filed a pro se civil rights
Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. 1) and an
Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2). The Court
will order Defendants Corizon and Elijah to answer the
Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Filing
Court will grant Plaintiff's Application to Proceed In
Forma Pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Plaintiff must pay
the statutory filing fee of $350.00. 28 U.S.C. §
1915(b)(1). The Court will assess an initial partial filing
fee of $15.64. The remainder of the fee will be collected
monthly in payments of 20% of the previous month's income
credited to Plaintiff's trust account each time the
amount in the account exceeds $10.00. 28 U.S.C. §
1915(b)(2). The Court will enter a separate Order requiring
the appropriate government agency to collect and forward the
fees according to the statutory formula. . . . . . . . .
Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints
Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners
seeking relief against a governmental entity or an officer or
an employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. §
1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion
thereof if a plaintiff has raised claims that are legally
frivolous or malicious, that fail to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a
defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §
pleading must contain a “short and plain statement of
the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to
relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2) (emphasis added). While
Rule 8 does not demand detailed factual allegations,
“it demands more than an unadorned,
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).
“Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of
action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not
complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as
true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on
its face.'” Id. (quoting Bell Atlantic
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is
plausible “when the plaintiff pleads factual content
that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that
the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.”
Id. “Determining whether a complaint states a
plausible claim for relief [is] . . . a context-specific task
that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial
experience and common sense.” Id. at 679.
Thus, although a plaintiff's specific factual allegations
may be consistent with a constitutional claim, a court must
assess whether there are other “more likely
explanations” for a defendant's conduct.
Id. at 681.
the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has
instructed, courts must “continue to construe pro
se filings liberally.” Hebbe v. Pliler,
627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010). A “complaint [filed
by a pro se prisoner] ‘must be held to less
stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by
lawyers.'” Id. (quoting Erickson v.
Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per curiam)).
names Corizon Health (“Corizon”), Medical
Provider Itoro Elijah, and Utilization Management Committee
Members Doe 1, Doe 2, and Doe 3 as Defendants in his
one-count Complaint. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief and
alleges his Eighth Amendment rights were violated when he was
denied adequate medical care. Plaintiff claims that in 1990,
he was diagnosed with a “subarachnoid cyst of [the]
left temporal lobe location and an IP shunt was placed in his
head to reduce pressure and relieve seizures.” In 1995,
Plaintiff was hit in the head and the shunt was loosened and
moved from its original location. Between 2010 and 2012, MRI
scans showed that the cyst had grown, but a neurosurgeon told
him that “the cyst needed to reach a class 3 before any
action would be done.” In February 2017, Plaintiff had
“an incident while working out, ” and saw
Defendant Elijah for the purpose of determining whether the
incident had compromised the shunt “and/or caused
severing of shunt at cyst in left temporal lobe of
brain.” After the incident, Plaintiff noticed
“headaches, vision problems, seizures and feeling like
passing out.” Plaintiff claims that on March 31, 2017,
Defendant Elijah refused any treatment or tests on the shunt.
Defendant Elijah left, Nurse Practitioner Bass examined
Plaintiff and determined the shunt might be compromised.
Nurse Practitioner Bass submitted three separate requests for
Plaintiff to receive a MRI, which were denied by the
Utilization Management team, Defendants Doe 1, Doe 2, and Doe
3. Plaintiff claims “there has . . . also been no other
attempt to do any other tests to determine what is causing
these problems that Plaintiff is suffering.” Plaintiff
alleges that Defendants Doe 1, Doe 2, and Doe 3 denied the
requests for an MRI based on Corizon's custom of managing
costs by denying outside medical tests for inmates. Plaintiff
claims the refusals show a pattern of deliberate indifference
to Plaintiff's serious medical needs. Plaintiff claims
that if his cyst is not properly monitored, it will cause
further injury to his brain and needless suffering.
construed, Plaintiff has adequately stated an Eighth
Amendment medical claim against Defendants Elijah and
Corizon. The Court will ...