Josey v. Rock et al

Filing 58

MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED, that the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 53 ) is accepted and adopted. ORDERED, that defendants' motion (Dkt. No. 37 ) for summary judgment is granted and the case dismissed on the merits in its entirety. ORDERED, that plaintiff's motion (Dkt. No. 55 ) is denied. Signed by Judge Norman A. Mordue on 4/10/13. (served on plaintiff by regular mail) (alh, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg

DEREK JOSEY,
Plaintiff,
-v-

9:11-CV-28 (NAM/TWD)

N

DAVID ROCK, P. HEATH, E. RUSSELL, CAPT.
HOLDRIDGE, W. REDMOND, SARAH HICKS,
JANE DOE, DR. THOMPSON, R. RAO, DR.
ADAMS, M.D. LESTER WRIGHT, B. FISCHER,
Defendants.
gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg

APPEARANCES:

A

Derek Josey, 01-A-5108
Five Points Correctional Facility
Caller Box 119
Romulus, New York 14541
Plaintiff, pro se
Hon. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General for the State of New York
Adele M. Taylor-Scott, Esq., Assistant Attorney General
Stephen M. Kerwin, Esq., Assistant Attorney General
The Capitol
Albany, New York 12224
Counsel for Defendants

M

Hon. Norman A. Mordue, U.S. District Judge:
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, an inmate in the custody of the New York State Department of Corrections and
Community Supervision (“DOCCS”), brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging a
violation of his Eighth Amendment right to adequate medical care. In his complaint (Dkt. No. 1),
he alleges that defendants wrongfully discontinued his prescription for Ultram, a pain medication.
Defendants moved (Dkt. No. 37) for summary judgment. Upon referral pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72.3(c), United States Magistrate Judge Thérèse Wiley
Dancks issued a thorough Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 53) setting forth a detailed
summary of the record and analyzing the evidence in light of the law applicable to the three
groups of defendants: medical personnel, non-medical personnel, and central office personnel.
Magistrate Judge Dancks recommends that summary judgment be granted dismissing the
complaint in its entirety.
N

Plaintiff has submitted an objection (Dkt. No. 54). In view of plaintiff’s comprehensive
objections, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court conducts a de novo review of all
aspects of the Report and Recommendation. Upon de novo review, the Court accepts and adopts
the Report and Recommendation in all respects.
On April 8, 2013, plaintiff filed a “Motion for Preliminary Injunction” (Dkt. No. 55). To

A

the extent that plaintiff’s submission is intended to supplement the claims presently before the
Court, it lacks merit for the same reasons that plaintiff’s present claims lack merit. To the extent
that plaintiff’s submission is intended to assert new claims regarding recent events, these claims
are not before the Court in this action. Likewise, except for Dr. Thompson, it does not appear that
the people of whose conduct he complains in his new submission are before the Court. As for Dr.
Thompson, it appears that he gave plaintiff the relief he wanted; in any event, plaintiff’s

M

allegations against Dr. Thompson fail to state a claim for medical indifference. Plaintiff’s new
submission does not assist him in resisting summary judgment, nor does it warrant any injunctive
relief.
It is therefore
ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 53) is accepted and adopted;

-2-

and it is further
ORDERED that defendants’ motion (Dkt. No. 37) for summary judgment is granted and
the case dismissed on the merits in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion (Dkt. No. 55) is denied; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to serve copies of this MemorandumDecision and Order in accordance with the Local Rules of the Northern District of New York.
N

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: April 10, 2013
Syracuse, New York

A
M

-3-