United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Texarkana Division
O. Hickey, Chief United States District Judge.
the Court is a Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 18) filed by
Defendant Correct Care Solutions (“CCS”) and
Defendant Dr. Meline Jones-Foster (“Defendant
Jones-Foster”). Plaintiff has filed a response. (ECF No.
27). The Court finds this matter ripe for consideration.
a civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983. Plaintiff is currently incarcerated in the Department
of Community Correction, Central Arkansas Community
Correction Center, in Little Rock, Arkansas. The incidents
giving rise to Plaintiff's claims occurred while he was
incarcerated in the Southwest Arkansas Community Correction
Center (“SWACCC”) in Texarkana, Arkansas, serving
a sentence as a result of a judgment or conviction. (ECF No.
11, p. 3).
filed his Complaint on February 25, 2019, in the Eastern
District of Arkansas. (ECF No. 2). On March 4, 2019, the case
was transferred to the Western District of Arkansas,
Texarkana Division. (ECF No. 4). Plaintiff's motion to
proceed in forma pauperis was granted that same day.
(ECF No. 6). In response to this Court's order (ECF No.
8), Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint on April 22, 2019.
(ECF No. 11).
only reference to Defendant CCS in his Amended Complaint is
in the case caption. (ECF No. 11, p. 1). He does not make any
specific allegations against CCS in the body of the Amended
Complaint. As to Defendant Jones-Foster, Plaintiff claims she
denied him adequate medical care on January 28, 2019 when she
“[t]old me since I was off my meds when I was on
streets she wasn't giving me my meds my cancer doctor
proscribed. And If I learned to stay out of prison I
wouldn't have to worry about them putting me on my
meds.” (ECF No. 11, p. 4). When asked to describe the
custom or policy that caused the violation by Defendant
Jones-Foster Plaintiff states, “Dr. Jones-Foster
neglecting proper medical care.” Plaintiff seeks
compensatory and punitive damages and requests a
“written apology and Doctor to lose license.”
(ECF No. 11, p. 7).
28, 2019, Defendants CCS and Jones-Foster filed the instant
Motion to Dismiss, arguing that Plaintiff has failed to state
a claim against them upon which relief can be granted. (ECF
No. 18). Specifically, they contend that Plaintiff only makes
specific allegations against Defendants Jones-Foster, Reed
and Keener, and does not make any reference to Defendant CCS
other than listing the company as a defendant in the caption
of the Amended Complaint. Id. at p. 1.
also argue that Plaintiff set forth a claim alleging
“medical neglect mental anguish” against
Defendant Jones-Foster. Defendants argue that negligence does
not state a constitutional deprivation and therefore,
Plaintiff has failed to state a claim under section 1983.
8(a) contains the general pleading rules and requires a
complaint to present “a short and plain statement of
the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to
relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). “In order to meet
this standard, and survive a motion to dismiss under Rule
12(b)(6), ‘a complaint must contain sufficient factual
matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face.'” Braden v. Wal-Mart
Stores, Inc., 588 F.3d 585, 594 (8th Cir. 2009) (quoting
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)
(internal quotations omitted)). “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.”
Ashcroft, 556 U.S. at 678. While the Court will
liberally construe a pro se plaintiff's
complaint, the plaintiff must allege sufficient facts to
support his claims. See Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d
912, 914 (8th Cir. 2004).
has named Defendant CCS in the caption of the case but has
not made specific claims against the company in his Amended
order to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a
plaintiff must allege each defendant acted under color of
state law and that he or she violated a right secured by the
constitution. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 108 S.Ct.
2250, 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988); Dunham v. Wadley, 195
F.3d 1007, 1009 (8th Cir. 1999). A complaint should be
dismissed for failure to state a claim if the plaintiff's
complaint sets forth no facts against a defendant to support
the purported cause of action. Schaller Tel. Co. v.
Golden Sky Sys., Inc., 298 F.3d 736, 740 (8th Cir.
2002). “Where a complaint alleges no specific act or
conduct on the part of the defendant and the complaint is
silent as to the defendant except for his ...