United States District Court, D. Oregon, Pendleton Division
OPINION AND ORDER
E JOPES, SENIOR DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
Alien Lee Wiley (Wiley), acting pro se, brought this
prisoner civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983 [#2]. His claim arises from the medical care he received
while incarcerated at the Two Rivers Correctional Institution
(TRCl) in Umatilla, Oregon. He alleges that the State of
Oregon and Nurse McCallhan violated his Eighth Amendment right
when they acted with deliberate indifference to his medical
needs. Wiley seeks unspecified monetary damages to compensate
for the physical and emotional harm caused by defendants.
filed a motion for summary judgment [#23]. Wiley filed a
response consisting of a letter in which he states: "I
have given the Courts all the eye witness information I could
remember...! have no more to offer in this case other than a
Court Hearing of me Testifiying [sic] as to the events of
2016." [# 39] For the following reasons, defendants'
motion is GRANTED.
judgment is proper where pleadings, discovery, and affidavits
show there is "no genuine dispute as to any material
fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of
law." Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). The district court should
grant summary judgment if there are no genuine issues of
material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as
a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). If the moving party
shows that there are no genuine issues of material fact, the
burden shifts to the non-moving party to "go beyond the
pleadings and by [his] own affidavits or by the
'depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions
on file,' designate specific facts showing that there is
a genuine issue for trial." Celotex Corp. v.
Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-24 (1986) (quoting
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56) A scintilla of evidence, or evidence that is
merely colorable or not significantly probative, does not
present a genuine issue of materia! fact. United
Steeiworkers of America v. Phelps Dodge, 865 F.2d 1539,
1542 (9th Cir. 1989). Reasonable doubts as to the existence
of a materia! factual issue are resolved against the moving
party and inferences drawn from facts are viewed in the light
most favorable to the non-moving party. T. W. Elec.
Sen/., Inc. v. Pac. Elec. Contractors Ass'n, 809
F.2d 626, 630-31 (9th Cir. 1987). A pro se plaintiff
is to be held to a less stringent standard than a plaintiff
acting with assistance of counsel. Erickson v.
Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 95 (2007) (quoting Esteile v.
Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976)).
Eighth Amendment Claim
treatment a prisoner receives in prison is subject to
scrutiny under the Eighth Amendment. Helling v.
McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 31 (1993). The Eighth Amendment
imposes duties on prison officials to provide prisoners with
basic necessities, including medical care. Farmer v.
Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834 (1994). A prison official
violates the Eighth Amendment when two requirements are met:
(1) the deprivation alleged is objectively, sufficiently
serious, Farmer, 511 U.S. at 834, and (2) the prison
official possessed a sufficiently culpable state of mind.
Id. The official must know of and disregard an
excessive risk to an inmate's health. Farmer,
511 U.S. at 837.
January 31, 2016, Wiley was incarcerated in the Two Rivers
Correctional Institution (TRCI) in the Disciplinary
Segregation Unit (DSU). That evening, according to
Wiley's complaint, Callahan issued him the wrong blister
pack of medication. At the time she dispensed the medicine,
Callahan neither confirmed the blister pack was Wiley's
nor had him sign a form acknowledging receipt of the
medicine. Wiley claims he was sick all night with seizures
and vomiting and was unable to eat breakfast the following
morning, February 1, 2016, because he felt too weak.
that morning, Wiley states he told DSU Sergeant Espinoza that
Wiley suspected he had received the wrong medication.
Although he was dizzy and groggy, Wiley noted that he was
feeling better. He asked Espinoza to relate the incident to
Cailahan, have her check up on him, and ask her to make a
report for his file. Wiley never saw Callahan and never
received any medical attention.
support of their motion for summary judgment, defendants
provided two declarations: one from CaNahan [#24] and the
other from the Christopher Digiulio, M.D., the Deputy Medical
Director of the Oregon Department of Corrections [#25].
Callahan declares that she was employed as a registered nurse
at TRCI from June 2, 2011 to March 25, 2016 but was on
administrative leave and away from the facility from October
1, 2015 through March 25, 2016, a time span that includes the
date Wiley alleges he received the wrong medicine.
reviewed Wiley's medical chart and the DSU housing log.
As medical director, he is familiar with the practices and
procedures of both the medical staff when they dispense
medications, the DSU security staff when they perform tier
checks and observe the inmates throughout the day and night,
and the interaction between the two groups. He declares that
Wiley received daily attention from the Health Services
nursing staff who came to his cell each day to give him his
prescribed medications. "Wiley did not tell Health
Services staff that he had the wrong ...