DREWRY v. CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS et al

Filing 95

ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE 90 Report and Recommendations; granting in part and denying in part 25 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; granting in part and denying in part 33 Motion to Amend; REMINDER: After entry of this Order, if Amending a COMPLAINT, counsel are REQUIRED to separately file the AMENDED COMPLAINT Document; denying 44 Motion to Amend. REMINDER: After entry of this Order, if Amending a COMPLAINT, counsel are REQUIRED to separately file the AMENDED COMPLAINT Document; granting 68 Plaintiff's Supplemental Pleading; denying 75 Plaintiff's Motion for Injunctive Relief; granting 84 Plaintiff's Supplemental Pleading. By JUDGE GEORGE Z. SINGAL. (MSH)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of Maine

BRANDON B. DREWRY,
Plaintiff
v.
CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS, ET
AL.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 1:14-cv-00392-GZS

ORDER AFFIRMING THE
RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on September 4, 2015, his
Recommended Decision (ECF No. 90). Plaintiff filed his Objection to the Recommended Decision
(ECF No. 91) on September 17, 2015. Defendants filed their Objection to the Recommended
Decision (ECF No. 92) on September 18, 2015. Plaintiff filed a Response to Defendants’
Objection the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 93) on September 24, 2015.
I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together
with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the
Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United
States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in his Recommended Decision, and determine
that no further proceeding is necessary.
1.

It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge
is hereby AFFIRMED.

2.

It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 25) is
GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff’s claims based on

Defendants’ treatment of Plaintiff’s complaints regarding mental health, headaches,
cold sores and acid reflux are DISMISSED. The Motion is otherwise DENIED;
3.

It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion to Amend (ECF No. 33)
is GRANTED IN PART as to Plaintiff’s request to join Dr. Webster and CrossSnell as Defendants, and DENIED IN PART as to Plaintiff’s Request to Join Mr.
Atkinson, Mr. Bouffard, and Mr. Fitzpatrick as Defendants;

4.

It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Amended-Corrected Complaint (ECF No.
44) to join Dr. Hockersmith as a Defendant is hereby DENIED;

5.

It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Supplemental Pleading (ECF No. 68) is
GRANTED to permit his claim against Robin Cross-Snell;

6.

It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Injunctive Relief (ECF No. 75)
is hereby DENIED;

7.

It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Supplemental Pleading (ECF No. 84) by
which he reasserts his request to join Dr. Webster as a Defendant (ECF No. 33) is
hereby GRANTED.

/s/George Z. Singal_____________
U.S. District Judge
Dated this 28th day of September, 2015.