Moore v. Northern Regional Jail et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING 26 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE. The plaintiffs amended complaint is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. It is ORDERED that this civil action be DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the ac tive docket of this Court. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment on this matter. Signed by Senior Judge Frederick P. Stamp, Jr. on 2/13/17. (copy to Pro Se Plaintiff via CM/rrr) (lmm) Modified on 2/13/2017 (lmm). (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/13/2017: # 1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (lmm).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
Civil Action No. 5:16CV24
NORTHERN REGIONAL JAIL,
PRIME CARE MEDICAL,
WEXFORD MEDICAL and
OHIO VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER,
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The pro se1 plaintiff, a state inmate, instituted this civil
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
ECF No. 1.
The plaintiff was
granted leave to amend his complaint, which he filed with this
Court on September 8, 2016.
ECF No. 24.
In his amended complaint,
the plaintiff asserts that his lower right leg has poor circulation
and began to bleed as a result of dry and chapped skin during
The plaintiff alleges that he complained of the
condition to unknown officers and filled out several sick call
slips, but received no response.
The plaintiff further alleges
that his lower right leg became badly infected as a result of
Northern Regional Jail and Prime Care Medical’s failure to provide
“Pro se” describes a person who represents himself in a court
proceeding without the assistance of a lawyer.
Dictionary 1416 (10th ed. 2014).
him with timely medical care.
After providing him some care, the
plaintiff asserts that Prime Care Medical denied him future medical
Additionally, the plaintiff alleges that an unknown officer
from internal affairs at Northern Regional Jail took his recorded
statement and pictures of the infected wound.
As a result of the
jail’s internal affairs involvement, the plaintiff asserts that one
The plaintiff concedes that he began receiving daily
treatment in March 2015, but asserts that the wound persisted due
to his poor circulation.
The plaintiff also alleges that his hand was broken on
November 5, 2015, and, after x-rays confirmed his hand was broken,
unknown medical staff informed him that he was on the list for
outside surgery but could not give him a date or time.
plaintiff contends that he was taken to Ohio Valley Medical Center
(“OVMC”) on December 24, 2015, for issues concerning his leg and
that he also complained about his hand while being treated.
plaintiff asserts that a doctor at OVMC also took x-rays and
confirmed his hand was broken. The plaintiff indicated that it was
his understanding that the unknown orthopedist at OVMC would
discharged on December 27, 2015.
The plaintiff then asserts that the broken bone in his hand
began to heal in a deformed manner.
The plaintiff alleges that he
inquired about the status of his surgery on January 25, 2016, and
that unknown medical staff told him that his appointment had been
cancelled more than once due to transportation issues.
Highlands Regional Jail.
The plaintiff maintains that he cannot
make a fist and is basically handicapped because he never underwent
surgery on his hand.
For relief, the plaintiff’s amended complaint asks this Court
Medical, and OVMC accountable and award him $1,000,000.00 from each
defendant for a total of $4,000,000.00 for “pain and suffering,
neglect, failure to provide [him] with medical treatment in a
timely manner, file treatment, mental and physical damage, and
ignoring [his] medical conditions, unlawful treatment, and less
than human treatment.”
ECF No. 24 at 13.
United States Magistrate Judge Robert W. Trumble then entered
a report and recommendation.
ECF No. 26.
In that report and
recommendation, the magistrate judge concluded that the plaintiff
did not exhaust all available administrative remedies as required
by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e. Accordingly, the magistrate judge recommends
that the amended complaint be dismissed with prejudice.
plaintiff did not file objections to the report and recommendation
of the magistrate judge.
For the reasons set forth below, the
report and recommendation of the magistrate judge (ECF No. 26) is
AFFIRMED and ADOPTED.
Therefore, the amended complaint (ECF No.
24) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court must conduct
recommendation to which objection is timely made.
objections were filed, all findings and recommendations will be
upheld unless they are “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.”
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A).
As the Supreme Court of the United States
stated in United States v. United States Gypsum Co., “a finding is
‘clearly erroneous’ when although there is evidence to support it,
the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the
definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.”
333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948).
After reviewing the amended complaint and the record, this
Court is not “left with the definite and firm conviction that a
mistake has been committed” by the magistrate judge. United States
Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. at 395.
Under the Prison Litigation Reform
Act (“PLRA”), a prisoner must exhaust his available administrative
The prisoner must “us[e] all steps that the agency
holds out and do so properly.”
Woodford v. Ngo, 548 U.S. 81,
The magistrate judge notes that the defendant did not
raise exhaustion as an affirmative defense, but also correctly
notes that the Court is not foreclosed from dismissing a case sua
sponte on exhaustion grounds.
See Anderson v. XYZ Corr. Health
Servs, Inc., 407 F.3d 674, 681 (4th Cir. 2005).
The West Virginia Regional Jail Authority makes available to
its inmates a grievance procedure through which they may seek
The inmate initiates this procedure by submitting a
grievance to the Administrator of the facility in which he or she
Only after completing the remainder of the grievance
procedure and receiving an unfavorable decision may an inmate file
an action in federal court.
It is apparent from the amended
Northern Regional Jail or Potomac Highlands Regional Jail.
Because it is clear from the face of the amended complaint
that the plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies,
appropriate. See Anderson, 407 F.3d at 682. For that reason, this
Court finds no error in the magistrate judge’s findings and
administrative remedies, his claim would still be subject to
dismissal because § 1983 requires a plaintiff to name an individual
The plaintiff must name an individual defendant to
demonstrate that a person acting under the color of state law
deprived him of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution or
federal laws. See Rendall-Baker v. Kohn, 457 U.S. 830, 838 (1982).
Here, the plaintiff failed to name any individual defendant.
Accordingly, the report and recommendation is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED
in its entirety.
For the reasons set forth above, the report and recommendation
of the magistrate judge is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED.
plaintiff’s amended complaint is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
remedies would normally result in dismissal without prejudice.
However, the Court dismisses with prejudice because the plaintiff’s
failure to name an individual defendant means that the civil action
Further, it is ORDERED that this civil
action be DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the active docket of this
Finally, this Court finds that the plaintiff was properly
advised by the magistrate judge that failure to timely object to
the report and recommendation in this action would result in a
waiver of appellate rights.
Because the plaintiff has failed to
object, he has waived his right to seek appellate review of this
See Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 844-45 (4th Cir.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
The Clerk is DIRECTED to transmit a copy of this memorandum
opinion and order to the pro se plaintiff by certified mail and to
counsel of record herein.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 58, the Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment on this
February 13, 2017
/s/ Frederick P. Stamp, Jr.
FREDERICK P. STAMP, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?