Camp v. Northeast Ohio Neighborhood Health Services, Inc. et al

Filing 10

Memorandum Opinion and Order: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 4 ) is DENIED as MOOT and plaintiff's request to dismiss her case pursuant to Rule 41(a) and pursue administrative remedies is GRANTED. Judge Patricia A. Gaughan on 9/19/11. (LC,S)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

Vashalla Camp,
Plaintiff,
Vs.
Northeast Ohio Neighborhood
Health Services, Inc., et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 1:11 CV 1577
JUDGE PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN

Memorandum of Opinion and Order

INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court upon defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 4). This is a
medical malpractice case. For the reasons that follow, plaintiff’s alternative request to dismiss
her case pursuant to Rule 41(a) and pursue administrative remedies is GRANTED. Defendant’s
motion to dismiss is therefore MOOT.
DISCUSSION
Plaintiff, Vashalla Camp, filed this lawsuit against defendants, Northeast Ohio
Neighborhood Health Services, Inc., NEON Superior Health Center, and several John/Jane Doe
Defendants (collectively, “NEON”). Plaintiff alleges that on February 24, 2010, she appeared at
1

NEON for an appointment. While there, she received an injection intended for a different
patient. Thereafter, she filed this lawsuit in state court. The sole count in the complaint is a
claim for negligence. On August 1, 2011, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of
Ohio certified that the defendants were acting within the scope of their authority as a deemed
federal facility at the time of the incident. Accordingly, defendants removed this matter to
federal court. Defendants now move to dismiss this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Plaintiff opposes the motion and, in the alternative, requests that the Court allow plaintiff to seek
leave to dismiss the complaint voluntarily in order to pursue administrative remedies.
Defendants expressly indicate that they do not object to allowing plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss
her case in order to pursue administrative remedies. As such, the Court will GRANT plaintiff’s
alternative request.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 4) is DENIED as
MOOT and plaintiff’s request to dismiss her case pursuant to Rule 41(a) and pursue
administrative remedies is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Patricia A. Gaughan
PATRICIA A. GAUGHAN
United States District Judge
Dated: 9/19/11

2