Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_11-cv-08070/USCOURTS-azd-3_11-cv-08070-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

James Jackson Ellsworth, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Prison Health Services, Inc., et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 11-8070-PCT-RCB (MEA)

ORDER

Plaintiff James Jackson Ellsworth, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison ComplexFlorence in Florence, Arizona, has filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 (Doc. 1) and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2). The Court will

order Defendants Prison Health Services, Inc., and Dr. Mortenson to answer Counts One and

Two of the Complaint and will dismiss the remaining claims and Defendants without prejudice.

I. Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Filing Fee

Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis will be granted. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a). Plaintiff must pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). The

Court will assess an initial partial filing fee of $18.52. The remainder of the fee will be

collected monthly in payments of 20% of the previous month’s income each time the amount

in the account exceeds $10.00. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The Court will enter a separate Order

Case 3:11-cv-08070-JAJ Document 5 Filed 05/06/11 Page 1 of 7
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

requiring the appropriate government agency to collect and forward the fees according to the

statutory formula.

II. Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints

The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against

a governmental entity or an officer or an employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if a plaintiff has raised

claims that are legally frivolous or malicious, that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28

U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). 

A 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) (emphasis added). While Rule 8 does not

demand detailed factual allegations, “it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendantunlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009).

“Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory

statements, do not suffice.” Id. 

“[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim

to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Id. (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S.

544, 570 (2007)). A claim is plausible “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. “Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief [is] . . . a contextspecific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and common

sense.” Id. at 1950. Thus, although a plaintiff’s specific factual allegations may be consistent

with a constitutional claim, a court must assess whether there are other “more likely

explanations” for a defendant’s conduct. Id. at 1951.

But as the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has instructed, courts

must “continue to construe pro se filings liberally.” Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir.

2010). A “complaint [filed by a pro se prisoner] ‘must be held to less stringent standards than

formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.’” Id. (quoting Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007)

Case 3:11-cv-08070-JAJ Document 5 Filed 05/06/11 Page 2 of 7
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 -

(per curiam)).

III. Complaint

In his four-count Complaint, Plaintiff sues the following Defendants: Prison Health

Services, Inc. (PHS), which is the prison health provider at the Mohave County Detention

Center; and Mohave County Detention Center’s Deputy Director Jeffrey Brown, Jail

Commander Bruce Brown, and Doctor Mortenson.

In each count, Plaintiff alleges a violation of his Eighth Amendment rights. He contends

that he has suffered from multiple sclerosis for many years. In Count One, Plaintiff alleges that

Defendant PHS would not allow treatment for multiple sclerosis. Specifically, Plaintiff

contends that he was transported to his personal neurologist in June 2010, the neurologist

prescribed medication and injections, but Defendant PHS “refused to allow the treatment

because their protocol did not allow it.” In Count Two, he asserts that Defendant Mortenson

was deliberately indifferent to Plaintiff’s serious medical needs because, in January and

February 2010, Defendant Mortenson informed Plaintiff that the jail did not stock medications

to treat multiple sclerosis, did not treat Plaintiff’s multiple sclerosis, and informed Plaintiff that

he would not be treated for multiple sclerosis, “end of story.”

In Counts Three and Four, Plaintiff contends that Defendants Jeffrey Brown and Bruce

Brown were aware of widespread problems with medical treatment at the Mohave County

Detention Center, but did nothing to correct the problem, and were aware of Plaintiff’s nontreatment and “chose to do nothing.”

In his Request for Relief, Plaintiff seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief.

IV. Claims for Which an Answer Will be Required

A pretrial detainee’s claim for unconstitutional conditions of confinement arises from

the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause rather than from the Eighth Amendment

prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 535 and n.16

(1979). Nevertheless, the same standards are applied, requiring proof that the defendant acted

with deliberate indifference. See Frost v. Agnos, 152 F.3d 1124, 1128 (9th Cir. 1998).

Liberally construed, Plaintiff has stated Fourteenth Amendment deliberate-indifference

Case 3:11-cv-08070-JAJ Document 5 Filed 05/06/11 Page 3 of 7
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 4 -

claims against Defendants PHS and Mortenson. Thus, the Court will require Defendants PHS

and Mortenson to answer Counts One and Two.

V. Failure to State a Claim

Defendants Jeffrey Brown and Bruce Brown are not liable simply because they were

aware of problems regarding medical treatment at the Detention Center and failed to correct

them. See Shehee v. Luttrell, 199 F.3d 295, 300 (6th Cir. 1999) (defendants did not commit

constitutional violations when they denied administrative grievances, failed to intervene on

plaintiff’s behalf, and failed to remedy allegedly unconstitutional behavior). Moreover, Mohave

County, not Defendants Jeffrey Brown and Bruce Brown, is responsible for providing medical

care to county jail inmates. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 11-291(A). Thus, the Court will dismiss

without prejudice Counts Three and Four and Defendants Jeffrey Brown and Bruce Brown.

VI. Warnings

A. Release

Plaintiff must pay the unpaid balance of the filing fee within 120 days of his release.

Also, within 30 days of his release, he must either (1) notify the Court that he intends to pay the

balance or (2) show good cause, in writing, why he cannot. Failure to comply may result in

dismissal of this action.

B. Address Changes

Plaintiff must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule

83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff must not include a motion for other

relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this

action.

C. Copies

Plaintiff must serve Defendants, or counsel if an appearance has been entered, a copy of

every document that he files. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(a). Each filing must include a certificate stating

that a copy of the filing was served. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d). Also, Plaintiff must submit an

additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. See LRCiv 5.4. Failure to comply may

result in the filing being stricken without further notice to Plaintiff.

Case 3:11-cv-08070-JAJ Document 5 Filed 05/06/11 Page 4 of 7
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 5 -

D. Possible Dismissal

If Plaintiff fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including these

warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963

F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply

with any order of the Court).

IT IS ORDERED: 

(1) Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2) is granted. 

(2) As required by the accompanying Order to the appropriate government agency,

Plaintiff must pay the $350.00 filing fee and is assessed an initial partial filing fee of $18.52.

(3) Counts Three and Four and Defendants Jeffrey Brown and Bruce Brown are

dismissed without prejudice.

(4) Defendants Prison Health Services, Inc., and Dr. Mortenson must answer Counts

One and Two.

(5) The Clerk of Court must send Plaintiff a service packet including the Complaint

(Doc. 1), this Order, and both summons and request for waiver forms for Defendants Prison

Health Services, Inc., and Dr. Mortenson.

(6) Plaintiff must complete and return the service packet to the Clerk of Court within

21 days of the date of filing of this Order. The United States Marshal will not provide service

of process if Plaintiff fails to comply with this Order.

(7) If Plaintiff does not either obtain a waiver of service of the summons or complete

service of the Summons and Complaint on a Defendant within 120 days of the filing of the

Case 3:11-cv-08070-JAJ Document 5 Filed 05/06/11 Page 5 of 7
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 6 -

Complaint or within 60 days of the filing of this Order, whichever is later, the action may be

dismissed as to each Defendant not served. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m); LRCiv 16.2(b)(2)(B)(i).

(8) The United States Marshal must retain the Summons, a copy of the Complaint,

and a copy of this Order for future use.

(9) The United States Marshal must notify Defendants of the commencement of this

action and request waiver of service of the summons pursuant to Rule 4(d) of the Federal Rules

of Civil Procedure. The notice to Defendants must include a copy of this Order. The Marshal

must immediately file signed waivers of service of the summons. If a waiver of service of

summons is returned as undeliverable or is not returned by a Defendant within 30 days

from the date the request for waiver was sent by the Marshal, the Marshal must:

(a) personally serve copies of the Summons, Complaint, and this Order upon

Defendant pursuant to Rule 4(e)(2) and/or Rule 4(h)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure; and

(b) within 10 days after personal service is effected, file the return of service

for Defendant, along with evidence of the attempt to secure a waiver of service of the

summons and of the costs subsequently incurred in effecting service upon Defendant.

The costs of service must be enumerated on the return of service form (USM-285) and

must include the costs incurred by the Marshal for photocopying additional copies of the

Summons, Complaint, or this Order and for preparing new process receipt and return

forms (USM-285), if required. Costs of service will be taxed against the personally

served Defendant pursuant to Rule 4(d)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,

unless otherwise ordered by the Court.

(10) A Defendant who agrees to waive service of the Summons and Complaint

must return the signed waiver forms to the United States Marshal, not the Plaintiff.

Case 3:11-cv-08070-JAJ Document 5 Filed 05/06/11 Page 6 of 7
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 7 -

(11) Defendant must answer the Complaint or otherwise respond by appropriate motion

within the time provided by the applicable provisions of Rule 12(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure.

(12) Any answer or response must state the specific Defendant by name on whose

behalf it is filed. The Court may strike any answer, response, or other motion or paper that does

not identify the specific Defendant by name on whose behalf it is filed.

(13) This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Mark E. Aspey pursuant to Rules 72.1

and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for all pretrial proceedings as authorized under

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 

DATED this 6 day of May, 2011. th

 

Case 3:11-cv-08070-JAJ Document 5 Filed 05/06/11 Page 7 of 7