United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
WILLIAM H. BAER Plaintiff
ROGER WILSON, et al., Defendants
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
SOLOMON OLIVER, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
se Plaintiff William H. Baer, a state prisoner
incarcerated at the Richland Correctional Institution
(“RCI”), brings this fee-paid action pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983 against defendants Roger Wilson (Chief
Inspector), Karen Stanforth (Assistant Chief Inspector),
Kelly Rose (Institutional Inspector), Dorene Burkhart (Health
Care Administrator), Racheal Wheeler (Nurse Practitioner),
Danny Hall (Nurse Practitioner), and Mbanefo Ojukwu (Nurse
Practitioner) (collectively, “Defendants”).
Plaintiff claims that Defendants denied him adequate medical
treatment while he was incarcerated at RCI. (ECF No. 1).
reasons that follow, this action is dismissed.
to the Complaint, Plaintiff arrived at RCI in July, 2018 with
a history of breathing and sinus problems. Plaintiff states
that these problems stemmed from his confinement in a
dormitory at Grafton Correctional Institution
(“GCI”) where he was exposed to water leaking
from the roof and “black mold” in the ceiling.
Shortly after he was moved to another dormitory at GCI,
Plaintiff began having “massive” breathing
problems and a chronic infection in his left sinus. In 2014
while at GCI, he was sent Ohio State University Hospital
where he received breathing treatments and antibiotics. Since
that time, Plaintiff has complained of symptoms such as
difficulty breathing, inability to walk, dizziness and
blackout spells, and coughing and vomiting. (Id.
states that since he arrived at RCI in July, 2018, his
symptoms have worsened to the point that he has received
allergy injections monthly, prednisone and antibiotics more
frequently, and breathing treatments. But Plaintiff alleges
that none of this medical treatments have been sufficient to
address his medical problems. (Id. ¶ 8-9).
filed an informal complaint with defendant Burkhart on
February 20, 2019 stating that while he has been seen by
several doctors, he has not undergone testing to determine
“what is wrong” with his health. Burkhart
responded that Plaintiff has asthma and allergic rhinitis,
and an MRI and CT scan are not warranted. Plaintiff took his
grievance to defendant Rose, who responded that he reviewed
the record and Plaintiff is being treated properly. He
received the same response from defendants Wilson and
Stanforth. Plaintiff was being treated with symbicort,
atrovert, prednisone, and antibiotics, and an X-Ray had been
performed. (Id. ¶ 10-17).
March 28, 2019, Plaintiff was seen by defendant Hall who
informed Plaintiff that the X-Ray showed he was suffering
from a sinus disease. Defendant Ojukwu saw Plaintiff on April
9, 2019 and told Plaintiff he had sinusitis and recommended a
CT scan and that Plaintiff be seen at the Franklin Medical
Center. On May 7, 2019, a CT scan was performed at the
Franklin Medical Center and he was seen by defendant Wheeler
on May 14, 2019. Wheeler informed Plaintiff that he had
sinusitis and would be seeing a doctor about possible
surgery, and they need to “find the right nasal spray
that fits the plaintiff's problem.” (Id.
alleges that he has been on antibiotics, nasal sprays,
antihistamines, steroids, and breathing treatments for the
past two years, and that Defendants have acted with
deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs and with
“reckless disregard and malice intent to deprive the
plaintiff of adequate medical treatment.” Plaintiff
alleges that Defendants' deliberate indifference has
resulted in Plaintiff suffering from anxiety, depression, and
paranoia that Defendants will allow his to die before
providing adequate medical care. (Id. ¶ 25,
relief, Plaintiff asks this court to enjoin Defendants from
transferring Plaintiff from RCI, award Plaintiff One Million
Dollars in compensatory and One Million Dollars in punitive
damages from each defendant, and order Defendants to adopt
policies and procedures at RCI that will provide adequate
treatment to prisoners. (Id. at 9-10).
LAW AND ANALYSIS
Standard of Review
Plaintiff paid the filing fee, screening under 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2) is inapplicable. However, as Plaintiff is a
prisoner at RCI, his status as a prisoner requires the court
to screen his Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A
regardless of whether the filing fee was paid. Lacoss v.
Engler, 234 F.3d 1268 (Table) (6th Cir. 2000)
(“[A]ll complaints filed by prisoners against state
officials, whether or not they are proceeding in forma
pauperis, are subject to sua sponte dismissal for
failure to state a claim.”) (citing 28 U.S.C. §
1915A; Benson v. O'Brian, 179 F.3d 1014, 1016
(6th Cir. 1999)); Siller v. Dean, 205 F.3d 1341
(Table) (6th Cir. 2000) (finding that district court
improperly dismissed fee paid prisoner civil rights case
pursuant to § 1915(e)(2)(B) but affirming the district
court's judgment because the complaint was properly
subject to dismissal pursuant to § 1915A) (citations
omitted); see also Nelson v. Janice, No.
2:14-CV-11256, 2014 WL 2765147, at *1 (E.D. Mich. June 18,
2014) (“[A] review of a ...