Gayden v. Sackler Family
Filing
6
ORDER TO AMEND: Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint that complies with the standards set forth above. Plaintiff must submit the amended complaint to this Court's Pro Se Intake Unit within 60 days of the date of this order, caption the document as an "Amended Complaint," and label the document with docket number 22-CV-5918 (LTS). An Amended Complaint form is attached to this order. No summons will issue at this time. If Plaintiff fails to comply within the time allowed, and he cannot show good cause to excuse such failure, the complaint will be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 8/1/2022) (sac)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
JOHN MATTHEW GAYDEN, JR., M.D.,
Plaintiff,
-against-
22-CV-5918 (LTS)
ORDER TO AMEND
SACKLER FAMILY,
Defendants.
LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge:
Plaintiff, who is currently incarcerated at Federal Correctional Complex Coleman, in
Florida, brings this action pro se. He sues Defendants, identified only as the “Sackler Family,”
for two claims. First, he alleges that Defendants misrepresented and misled him and other
physicians about the properties of the pharmaceutical drugs Oxycodone and Oxycontin. Second,
he seeks damages from Defendants in connection with the tragic death of his 21-year-old son in
2007, in Florida.
By order dated July 27, 2022, the Court granted Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma
pauperis (IFP), that is, without prepayment of fees. 1 For the reasons set forth below, the Court
grants Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint within 60 days of the date of this order.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The Prison Litigation Reform Act requires that federal courts screen complaints brought
by prisoners who seek relief against a governmental entity or an officer or employee of a
governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a prisoner’s in forma
pauperis complaint, or any portion of the complaint, that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a
1
Prisoners are not exempt from paying the full filing fee even when they have been
granted permission to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1).
claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is
immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B), 1915A(b); see Abbas v. Dixon, 480 F.3d
636, 639 (2d Cir. 2007). The Court must also dismiss a complaint if the court lacks subject
matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
BACKGROUND
The following allegations are from Plaintiff John Gayden’s complaint. Plaintiff practiced
general internal medicine for 29 years. ECF 2 at 6. Unspecified members of “the Sackler family”
are the “sole stockholders” of Purdue Pharma, LP (Purdue), which manufactures opioids. Id. In
other litigation, members of the Sackler family allegedly admitted to Purdue’s “aggressively
marketing and misbranding Oxycontin while downplaying its addiction and overdose risks.” Id.
at 2. Purdue’s paid medical specialists and drug representatives visited Plaintiff’s medical
practice in Florida monthly, providing detailed verbal and written instructions for prescribing its
medication, but the information that they provided him was misleading. Id. at 3. For example, he
was informed that the drugs were addictive in fewer than 1% of patients. Id. at 5. As a result of
following Purdue’s “guidelines,” Plaintiff “has been placed in prison.” Id. On this basis, Plaintiff
seeks $50 million from the “Sackler family.” Id. at 6-7.
Plaintiff further asserts “an opioid personal injury claim for the accidental overdose and
wrongful death of [his] son.” Id. at 7. In 2007, Plaintiff’s son, who was a “first time user” of
“Oxycontin-80 sold from a street drug dealer,” died in Florida. Id. The death certificate indicates
that the cause death “was an opioid overdose.” Id. Plaintiff seeks $50 million from the “Sackler
family” for the wrongful death of his son.
DISCUSSION
The subject matter jurisdiction of the federal district courts is limited. It is set forth
generally in 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. Under these statutes, federal jurisdiction is available
2
only when a “federal question” is presented or when plaintiff and defendant are citizens of
different states and the amount in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000. “‘[A]ny
party or the court sua sponte, at any stage of the proceedings, may raise the question of whether
the court has subject matter jurisdiction.’” United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local
919, AFL-CIO v. CenterMark Prop. Meriden Square, Inc., 30 F.3d 298, 301 (2d Cir. 1994)
(quoting Manway Constr. Co., Inc. v. Hous. Auth. of the City of Hartford, 711 F.2d 501, 503 (2d
Cir. 1983)); Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 574, 583 (1999) (“[S]ubject-matter
delineations must be policed by the courts on their own initiative . . . .”). “If the court determines
at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.” Fed. R.
Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
To invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff’s claims must arise “under the
Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 1331. A case arises under federal
law if the complaint “establishes either that federal law creates the cause of action or that the
plaintiff’s right to relief necessarily depends on resolution of a substantial question of federal
law.” Bay Shore Union Free Sch. Dist. v. Kain, 485 F.3d 730, 734-35 (2d Cir. 2007) (quoting
Empire Healthchoice Assur., Inc. v. McVeigh, 547 U.S. 677, 690 (2006)). Invoking federal
jurisdiction, without pleading any facts demonstrating a federal law claim, does not create
federal subject matter jurisdiction. See Nowak v. Ironworkers Local 6 Pension Fund, 81 F.3d
1182, 1188-89 (2d Cir. 1996).
Here, Plaintiff does not indicate that his claims arise under federal law, and it is not
apparent from the allegations of the complaint that it can be liberally construed as asserting a
federal claim. The Court thus cannot exercise federal question jurisdiction of the complaint.
3
Plaintiff also does not allege facts demonstrating that the Court has diversity jurisdiction
of this action. To establish jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, a plaintiff must first allege that
the plaintiff and the defendant are citizens of different states. Wis. Dep’t of Corr. v. Schacht, 524
U.S. 381, 388 (1998). In addition, the plaintiff must allege to a “reasonable probability” that the
claim is in excess of the sum or value of $75,000, the statutory jurisdictional amount. See 28
U.S.C. § 1332(a); Colavito v. N.Y. Organ Donor Network, Inc., 438 F.3d 214, 221 (2d Cir. 2006)
(citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
“An individual’s citizenship, within the meaning of the diversity statue, is determined by
his domicile.” Johnson v. Smithsonian, 4 Fed. App’x 69, 70 (2d Cir. 2001) (citing Palazzo v.
Corio, 232 F.3d 88, 42 (2d Cir. 2000)). There is a rebuttable presumption that a prisoner retains
his pre-incarceration domicile. See Blumatte v. Quinn, 521 F. Supp. 2d 308, 312 n.3 (S.D.N.Y.
2007); Housand v. Heiman, 594 F.2d 923, 925 n. 5 (2d Cir. 1979). Plaintiff has not specifically
pleaded facts about his own State citizenship. He does allege, however, that he had a medical
practice in Florida for 29 years, and that he is currently incarcerated in Florida. ECF 2 at 1, 6.
Even if the Court assumes that Plaintiff is a Florida citizen, the Court cannot determine
whether Defendants’ citizenship is diverse from his because he has not named specific
individuals as defendants or alleged facts about where each individual defendant is domiciled.
Plaintiff bears the burden of pleading facts showing diversity of citizenship, Schacht, 524 U.S. at
388, and the facts alleged in the complaint fail to show that the Court can exercise diversity
jurisdiction of this matter. The Court therefore cannot exercise subject matter jurisdiction of the
complaint.
LEAVE TO AMEND
Plaintiff proceeds in this matter without the benefit of an attorney. District courts
generally should grant a self-represented plaintiff an opportunity to amend a complaint to cure its
4
defects, unless amendment would be futile. See Hill v. Curcione, 657 F.3d 116, 123-24 (2d Cir.
2011); Salahuddin v. Cuomo, 861 F.2d 40, 42 (2d Cir. 1988). Indeed, the Second Circuit has
cautioned that district courts “should not dismiss [a pro se complaint] without granting leave to
amend at least once when a liberal reading of the complaint gives any indication that a valid
claim might be stated.” Cuoco v. Moritsugu, 222 F.3d 99, 112 (2d Cir. 2000) (quoting Gomez v.
USAA Fed. Sav. Bank, 171 F.3d 794, 795 (2d Cir. 1999)). Because Plaintiff may be able to allege
facts sufficient to invoke the Court’s jurisdiction, the Court grants Plaintiff 60 days’ leave to
amend his complaint to plead facts establishing subject matter jurisdiction.
In his amended complaint, Plaintiff must identify each defendant whom he seeks to sue.
He must identify each defendant by name in the caption of the complaint and provide a short and
plain statement of the relevant facts supporting each claim against each defendant. If, in his
amended complaint, Plaintiff invokes the Court’s diversity jurisdiction, he must plead facts
regarding the domicile of each defendant.
Plaintiff should include all of the information in the amended complaint that Plaintiff
wants the Court to consider in deciding whether the amended complaint states a claim for relief.
That information should include:
a) the names and titles of all relevant people;
b) a description of all relevant events, including what each defendant did or failed to do,
the approximate date and time of each event, and the general location where each
event occurred;
c) a description of the injuries Plaintiff suffered; and
d) the relief Plaintiff seeks, such as money damages, injunctive relief, or declaratory
relief.
5
Essentially, Plaintiff’s amended complaint should tell the Court: who violated his
federally protected rights and how; when and where such violations occurred; and why Plaintiff
is entitled to relief.
Because Plaintiff’s amended complaint will completely replace, not supplement, the
original complaint, any facts or claims that Plaintiff wants to include from the original complaint
must be repeated in the amended complaint.
CONCLUSION
Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint that complies with the standards
set forth above. Plaintiff must submit the amended complaint to this Court’s Pro Se Intake Unit
within 60 days of the date of this order, caption the document as an “Amended Complaint,” and
label the document with docket number 22-CV-5918 (LTS). An Amended Complaint form is
attached to this order. No summons will issue at this time. If Plaintiff fails to comply within the
time allowed, and he cannot show good cause to excuse such failure, the complaint will be
dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would
not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an
appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant
demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue).
Dated:
August 1, 2022
New York, New York
/s/ Laura Taylor Swain
LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN
Chief United States District Judge
6
U NITED S TATES D ISTRICT C OURT
S OUTHERN D ISTRICT OF N EW Y ORK
_____CV_______________
(Include case number if one has been
assigned)
Write the full name of each plaintiff.
AMENDED
-against-
COMPLAINT
Do you want a jury trial?
܆Yes ܆No
Write the full name of each defendant. If you need more
space, please write “see attached” in the space above and
attach an additional sheet of paper with the full list of
names. The names listed above must be identical to those
contained in Section II.
NOTICE
The public can access electronic court files. For privacy and security reasons, papers filed
with the court should therefore not contain: an individual’s full social security number or full
birth date; the full name of a person known to be a minor; or a complete financial account
number. A filing may include only: the last four digits of a social security number; the year of
an individual’s birth; a minor’s initials; and the last four digits of a financial account number.
See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2.
Rev. 2/10/17
I.
BASIS FOR JURISDICTION
Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction (limited power). Generally, only two types of
cases can be heard in federal court: cases involving a federal question and cases involving
diversity of citizenship of the parties. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, a case arising under the United
States Constitution or federal laws or treaties is a federal question case. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332,
a case in which a citizen of one State sues a citizen of another State or nation, and the amount
in controversy is more than $75,000, is a diversity case. In a diversity case, no defendant may
be a citizen of the same State as any plaintiff.
What is the basis for federal-court jurisdiction in your case?
܆Federal Question
܆Diversity of Citizenship
A. If you checked Federal Question
Which of your federal constitutional or federal statutory rights have been violated?
B. If you checked Diversity of Citizenship
1. Citizenship of the parties
Of what State is each party a citizen?
The plaintiff ,
, is a citizen of the State of
(Plaintiff’s name)
(State in which the person resides and intends to remain.)
or, if not lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States, a citizen or
subject of the foreign state of
.
If more than one plaintiff is named in the complaint, attach additional pages providing
information for each additional plaintiff.
Page 2
If the defendant is an individual:
The defendant,
, is a citizen of the State of
(Defendant’s name)
or, if not lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States, a citizen or
subject of the foreign state of
.
If the defendant is a corporation:
The defendant,
, is incorporated under the laws of
the State of
and has its principal place of business in the State of
or is incorporated under the laws of (foreign state)
and has its principal place of business in
.
If more than one defendant is named in the complaint, attach additional pages providing
information for each additional defendant.
II. PARTIES
A. Plaintiff Information
Provide the following information for each plaintiff named in the complaint. Attach additional
pages if needed.
First Name
Middle Initial
Last Name
Street Address
County, City
State
Telephone Number
Email Address (if available)
Zip Code
Page 3
B. Defendant Information
To the best of your ability, provide addresses where each defendant may be served. If the
correct information is not provided, it could delay or prevent service of the complaint on the
defendant. Make sure that the defendants listed below are the same as those listed in the
caption. Attach additional pages if needed.
Defendant 1:
First Name
Last Name
Current Job Title (or other identifying information)
Current Work Address (or other address where defendant may be served)
County, City
State
Zip Code
Defendant 2:
First Name
Last Name
Current Job Title (or other identifying information)
Current Work Address (or other address where defendant may be served)
County, City
State
Zip Code
Defendant 3:
First Name
Last Name
Current Job Title (or other identifying information)
Current Work Address (or other address where defendant may be served)
County, City
State
Zip Code
Page 4
Defendant 4:
First Name
Last Name
Current Job Title (or other identifying information)
Current Work Address (or other address where defendant may be served)
County, City
State
Zip Code
III. STATEMENT OF CLAIM
Place(s) of occurrence:
Date(s) of occurrence:
FACTS:
State here briefly the FACTS that support your case. Describe what happened, how you were
harmed, and what each defendant personally did or failed to do that harmed you. Attach
additional pages if needed.
Page 5
INJURIES:
If you were injured as a result of these actions, describe your injuries and what medical
treatment, if any, you required and received.
IV. RELIEF
State briefly what money damages or other relief you want the court to order.
Page 6
V. PLAINTIFF’S CERTIFICATION AND WARNINGS
By signing below, I certify to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief that: (1) the
complaint is not being presented for an improper purpose (such as to harass, cause
unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation); (2) the claims are supported
by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument to change existing law; (3) the factual
contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have
evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery;
and (4) the complaint otherwise complies with the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 11.
I agree to notify the Clerk's Office in writing of any changes to my mailing address. I
understand that my failure to keep a current address on file with the Clerk's Office may
result in the dismissal of my case.
Each Plaintiff must sign and date the complaint. Attach additional pages if necessary. If seeking to
proceed without prepayment of fees, each plaintiff must also submit an IFP application.
Dated
Plaintiff’s Signature
First Name
Middle Initial
Last Name
Street Address
County, City
Telephone Number
State
Zip Code
Email Address (if available)
I have read the Pro Se (Nonprisoner) Consent to Receive Documents Electronically:
܆Yes
܆No
If you do consent to receive documents electronically, submit the completed form with your
complaint. If you do not consent, please do not attach the form.
Page 7
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?