Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Shah v. B. Wooten and United States

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Eastern Division

June 16, 2016

VIVEK SHAH Reg. #XXXXX-XXX, Plaintiff,
v.
B. WOOTEN and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants.

          Vivek Shah, Plaintiff, Pro Se.

          B Wooten, Defendant, represented by Jamie Goss Dempsey, U.S. Attorney's Office.

          USA, Defendant, represented by Jamie Goss Dempsey, U.S. Attorney's Office.

          RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION

          BETH DEERE, Magistrate Judge.

         I. Procedures for Filing Objections

         This Recommended Disposition ("Recommendation") has been sent to Chief Judge Brian S. Miller. A party to this suit may file written objections with the Clerk of Court within fourteen (14) days of filing of the Recommendation. Objections must be specific and must include the factual or legal basis for the objection.

         By not objecting, you may waive any right to appeal questions of fact. And, if no objections are filed, Judge Miller can adopt this Recommendation without independently reviewing the record.

         II. Introduction

         Plaintiff Vivek Shah, an inmate formerly incarcerated in the Bureau of Prisons's ("BOP") Federal Correctional Institution - Forrest City ("FCI-FC"), filed this case without the help of a lawyer. (Docket entry #1) Mr. Shah complains that Defendant Wooten was deliberately indifferent to his medical needs and that the United States was negligent in providing him medical care while he was housed at FCI-FC. He brings his claims under Bivens v. Six Unknon Agents of the Fed. Bureau of Narcotis, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999 (1971) and the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671, et seq.

         Defendants have moved for summary judgment. (#27) Mr. Shah has not responded to the motion, and the time for doing so has passed. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants' motion for summary judgment (#27) should be GRANTED.

         III. Undisputed Factual Background

         On October 11, 2013, Vivek Shah arrived at the FCCI-FC. During his intake screening process, Mr. Shah told FCI officials that he suffered from chronic back pain. (#28-3 at p.20)

         Between October 2013 and May 2014, Mr. Shah submitted three inmate requests for medical care. On October 27, 2014, Mr. Shah requested that he be scheduled to have his teeth cleaned. ( Id. at p.26) On November 19, 2013, Mr. Shah requested glasses. ( Id. at p.28) And, on December 5, 2013, Mr. Shah requested various vaccinations. ( Id. at p.30)

         Defendant Wooten saw Mr. Shah in triage in Health Services on four occasions, October 29, 2013, July 24, 2013, September 16, 2014, and January 8, 2015. (#28-2 at p.2) During those encounters, Defendant Wooten placed him in ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.