Muthana v. Colley

Filing 41

OPINION and ORDER Adopting Magistrate Judge's 40 Report and Recommendation and Granting Defendants' 26 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Thomas L. Ludington. (KWin)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
NORTHERN DIVISION
ALI MUSAID MUTHANA.,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:22-cv-12624

v.

Honorable Thomas L. Ludington
United States District Judge

DARCY COLLEY.,
Defendants.
_________________________________________/

Honorable Kimberly G. Altman
United States Magistrate Judge

OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
On November 1, 2022, Plaintiff Ali Musaid Muthana—an inmate at Woodland Center
Correctional Facility1 in Whitmore Lake, Michigan—filed a pro se Complaint alleging Defendant
Darcy Colley, a Michigan Department of Corrections Qualified Mental Health Professional,
violated his Eight Amendment rights by being deliberately indifferent to his objectively serious
medical needs. See ECF No. 2 at PageID.35.2 Plaintiff sued Defendant in both her personal and
official capacities. ECF No. 1 at PageID.1.

1

Notably, the Woodland Center Correctional Facility “houses the Inpatient Mental Health and
Crisis Stabilization Program” for the Michigan Department of Corrections. Woodland Center
Correctional Facility (WCC), MDOC., https://www.michigan.gov/corrections/prisons/woodlandcenter-correctional-facility (last visited May 3, 2024) [https://perma.cc/TRF9-VQ82]. This
referral-based Program aims to diagnose, treat, and stabilize prisoners presently experiencing “a
serious mental health crisis. Id.
2
In lieu of hand writing his alleged statement of facts within his Complaint, Plaintiff noted to “See
Appendix A.” ECF No. 1 at PageID.3. But Appendix A appears to have been inadvertently
docketed as an exhibit to Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis instead of his Complaint.
See ECF No. 2 at PageID.35.  
- 1 - 

Plaintiff asserts three specific factual allegations in attempt to support his claim. First,
Plaintiff alleges Defendant “discriminated against and harassed” him “by repeatedly removing him
from group and constantly us[ing] racial slurs.” ECF No. 2 at PageID.35. Second, Plaintiff alleges
Defendant “attempted to kill” him by ordering a jail nurse to withhold his blood thinners for three
days. Id. Plaintiff specifically alleges that, on the third day, he was “rush[ed] to the hospital for an
angioplasty procedure” which revealed a “90% blood clot” in his heart. Id. Lastly, Plaintiff alleges
that Defendant told a jail officer “to write a false misconduct and to lock [P]laintiff inside his cell
for weeks.” Id.
On March 16, 2023, all pretrial matters were referred to Magistrate Judge Kimberly G.
Altman. ECF No. 17. In November 2023, Defendant filed a Motion for Summary Judgment which
explained (1) Defendant removed Plaintiff from group sessions because Defendant was being
disruptive and threatening, (2) Plaintiff’s relevant medication records revealed he received his
blood thinners every day, and (3) Plaintiff’s medical records do not “contain any entries suggesting
he was taken to a hospital” the day Plaintiff alleged he was. ECF No. 26 at PageID.114–18.
Defendant argued for summary judgment because (1) Plaintiff did not sufficiently demonstrate his
personal involvement; (2) Plaintiff’s allegations do not constitute an Eighth Amendment violation;
and (3) even if they did, he is entitled to qualified immunity in her personal capacity and sovereign
immunity in his official capacity. Id. at PageID.120–30.
On April 18, 2024, after reviewing the factual record in its entirety, Judge Altman issued
a report (R&R) recommending this Court grant Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF
No. 26, and dismiss the above-captioned case. ECF No. 40 at PageID.361–62. Judge Altman
concluded Defendant is entitled to absolute sovereign immunity on any claims Plaintiff pursues
against him in his official capacity. Id. at PageID.354–55. Judge Altman also concluded Plaintiff

- 2 - 

had not demonstrated Defendant’s personal involvement. Id. at PageID.355–56 (“It is simply not
plausible that [Plaintiff] was hospitalized due to missing his medications but cannot provide any
record of this occurring.”). Further, Judge Altman found Plaintiff’s allegations do not raise a
cognizable Eighth Amendment claim. Id. at PageID.356–60 (noting Plaintiff “did not put forth any
admissible evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether [Defendant] violated
his rights”). Finding no underlying constitutional violation, Judge Altman did not analyze whether,
in the alternative, qualified immunity would shield Defendant from liability on the claims asserted
against him in her personal capacity. Id. at PageID.361.
Judge Altman provided the Parties 14 days to object, but the Parties did not do so. Thus,
they have forfeited their right to appeal Judge Altman’s findings. See Berkshire v. Dahl, 928 F.3d
520, 530–31 (6th Cir. 2019) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985)). There is no clear
error in Judge Altman’s thorough R&R.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Kimberly G. Altman’s Report and
Recommendation, ECF No. 40, is ADOPTED.
Further, it is ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment ECF No. 26, is
GRANTED.
Further, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint, ECF No. 1, is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.
This is a final order and closes the above-captioned case.
Dated: May 10, 2024

s/Thomas L. Ludington
THOMAS L. LUDINGTON
United States District Judge

- 3 -