United States District Court, D. New Jersey, Camden Vicinage
EDWARD J. BAUMBACH, Plaintiff
LISA-RENEE MILLS, NP, SOUTH WOOD STATE PRISON MEDICAL DEPARTMENT, Defendants
RENÉE MARIE BUMB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Edward J. Baumbach, a prisoner confined in South Woods State
Prison in Bridgeton, New Jersey, brings this civil rights
action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Compl., ECF No. 1.)
Plaintiff filed an application to proceed in forma
pauperis (“IFP”) (ECF No. 1-2), which
establishes his eligibility to proceed without prepayment of
fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Plaintiff also filed a
motion to appoint pro bono counsel. (Mot. to Appoint Counsel,
ECF No. 2).
prisoner is permitted to proceed without prepayment of the
filing fee or when the prisoner pays the filing fee for a
civil action and seeks redress from a governmental entity,
officer or employee of a governmental entity, 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1915(e)(2)(B); 1915A(b) and 42 U.S.C. §
1997e(c)(1) require courts to review the complaint and
sua sponte dismiss any claims that are (1) frivolous
or malicious; (2) fail to state a claim on which relief may
be granted; or (3) seek monetary relief against a defendant
who is immune from such relief. For the reasons discussed
below, the Court will dismiss the complaint without prejudice
for failure to state a claim.
Sua Sponte Dismissal
must liberally construe pleadings that are filed pro
se. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007)
(quoting Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106
(1976)). Thus, “a pro se complaint, however
inartfully pleaded, must be held to ‘less stringent
standards than formal pleadings drafted by
lawyers.'” Id. (internal quotation marks
omitted). “Court personnel reviewing pro se
pleadings are charged with the responsibility of deciphering
why the submission was filed, what the litigant is seeking,
and what claims she may be making.” See Higgs v.
Atty. Gen. of the U.S., 655 F.3d 333, 339-40 (3d Cir.
2011) (quoting Jonathan D. Rosenbloom, Exploring Methods to
Improve Management and Fairness in Pro Se Cases: A Study of
the Pro Se Docket in the Southern District of New York, 30
Fordham Urb. L.J. 305, 308 (2002)).
pleading must contain a “short and plain statement of
the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to
relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). “To survive a
motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient
factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to
relief that is plausible on its face.'”
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570
(2007)). “A claim has facial plausibility when the
plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to
draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable
for the misconduct alleged.” Id. (quoting
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556.) Legal conclusions,
together with threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause
of action, do not suffice to state a claim. Id.
“a court considering a motion to dismiss can choose to
begin by identifying pleadings that, because they are no more
than conclusions, are not entitled to the assumption of
truth.” Id. at 679. “While legal
conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they
must be supported by factual allegations.” Id.
If a complaint can be remedied by an amendment, a district
court may not dismiss the complaint with prejudice but must
permit the amendment. Grayson v. Mayview State
Hospital, 293 F.3d 103, 108 (3d Cir. 2002).
alleges the following facts in his Complaint, accepted as
true for purposes of screening the complaint pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B); 1915A(b) and 42 U.S.C.
§ 1997e(c)(1). On July 11, 2018, Plaintiff told the
nurse on duty at morning pill call that he was having chest
pain. (Compl., ECF No. 1 at 5.) The nurse called a
“Code 53” and Plaintiff was given
“nitro.” (Compl., ECF No. 1 at 5.) Thirty minutes
later, Plaintiff was given Maalox. (Id.) Plaintiff
saw a nurse practitioner on July 13, 2018, and she sent him
back to the unit. (Id. at 6.) On July 14, 2018,
Plaintiff saw a nurse in sick call, and she gave him
“Acid Gas” pills. (Id.) Plaintiff
complained of shortness of breath and wheezing but no chest
x-ray was ordered. (Id.)
19, 2018, Plaintiff was scheduled for a chest x-ray on July
23. (Id.) In the meantime, Plaintiff was rushed to
the hospital on July 21, 2018. (Id.) Plaintiff
[i]f the Medical Department Nurse Practitioner Renee Mills
would of [sic] reviewed Plaintiff's medical history
instead of giving him Malox [sic] and sending Plaintiff back
to the unit, it would of [sic] revealed two (2) prior heart
attacks as well as blood clots and a collaspe [sic] lung.
Nurse Renee Mill[s], NP neglect is clear and she must be held
accountable as well as South Wood[s] State Prison Medical
Department. So now Plaintiff has to ware [sic] a heart
monitor and will need surgery to place a pacemaker in his
(Compl., ECF No. 1 at 6-7.)
Claims Under 42 ...