Booth v. Kilaru

Filing 36

ORDER Adopting 32 Report and Recommendation granting 23 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Ramesh Kilaru Signed by District Judge Bernard A. Friedman. (CMul)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

MILES BOOTH,
Plaintiff,

Civil Action No. 13-CV-12997
HON. BERNARD A. FRIEDMAN
MAG. JUDGE PATRICIA T. MORRIS

vs.
RAMESH KILARU,
Defendant.
______________________________/

OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris’s Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) dated June 30, 2014 [docket entry 32], in which she recommends
that the Court grant defendant’s motion for summary judgment [docket entry 23]. Plaintiff filed
an objection to the R&R [docket entry 34] and defendant filed a response [docket entry 35].
Since the Court has reviewed this matter de novo pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), and finds
that the magistrate judge’s recitation of the underlying facts is accurate, the Court will adopt her
summary of the factual record as it appears on pages 1 through 2 of the R&R.
In his objections, plaintiff reiterates that defendant violated his Eighth Amendment right
to be free from cruel and usual punishment by refusing to treat him with Allopurinol, a
medication used to treat symptoms related to gout. The Court disagrees.
Under the Eighth Amendment, “[p]rison authorities may be sued for deliberate
indifference to the serious medical needs of prisoners . . . because such indifference constitutes

-1-

the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain.” Smith v. Sator, 102 F. App’x 907, 909 (6th Cir.
2004) (citing Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 104 (1976)). However, “differences of opinion
between a plaintiff and his doctor regarding his diagnosis and treatment do not state an Eighth
Amendment claim.” Id. (citing Estelle, 429 U.S. at 107). In this case, plaintiff’s podiatrist
prescribed Allopurinol on an as needed basis to lower plaintiff’s uric acid levels, which could
otherwise cause gout. The record reflects that defendant consistently monitored plaintiff’s uric
acid levels over the course of several years, and during that time, plaintiff exhibited heightened
uric acid levels on only two occasions, neither of which coincided with symptoms of swelling
and pain in his feet. Thus, defendant’s decision not to treat plaintiff with Allopurinol does not
rise to the level of deliberate indifference sufficient to support a claim under the Eighth
Amendment. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris’s R&R dated June 30, 2014, is
hereby accepted and adopted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to file an
objection is denied as moot.

Dated: August 8, 2014
Detroit, Michigan

s/ Bernard A. Friedman______________
BERNARD A. FRIEDMAN
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-