From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gilmore v. Sicotte

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Apr 14, 2015
Civil Action No. 15-cv-00741-GPG (D. Colo. Apr. 14, 2015)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 15-cv-00741-GPG

04-14-2015

WILLIAM GILMORE, Plaintiff, v. TRUDY SICOTTE, PA, DAVID TESSIER, HCA, and FREMONT CORRECTIONAL FACILITY Defendants.


ORDER TO DISMISS IN PART AND TO DRAW CASE

Plaintiff William Gilmore is in the custody of the Colorado Department of Corrections and currently is incarcerated at the Fremont Correctional Facility in Canon City, Colorado. Plaintiff, acting pro se, initiated this action by filing a Prisoner Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and a Prisoner's Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed pursuant to § 1915.

Plaintiff asserts that his constitutional rights have been violated because Defendants Frank Cordova and George Santini have refused to treat his severe allergies and provide him Benadryl and an EpiPen to counter any allergy attack. Plaintiff further asserts that he has suffered Anaphylaxis shock three times in his life due to his allergies and has been told that if he suffers a fourth episode his survival rate without medication is only about twenty percent. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief and compensatory damages. These claims asserted against Defendants Cordova and Santini will be drawn to a presiding judge and when applicable to a magistrate judge.

Plaintiff, however, may not sue the Federal Bureau of Prisons for damages in a Bivens action. The United States has not waived sovereign immunity for itself or its agencies under Bivens for constitutional tort claims. FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 486 (1994); Chapoose v. Hodel, 831 F.2d 931, 935 (10th Cir. 1987). Any Bivens claims for damages against the Bureau are barred by sovereign immunity. Furthermore, a request for injunctive relief against BOP subordinate officials is not construed as a suit against the BOP because an injunction against the named individuals would not be granted against the BOP. See Jordan v. Sosa, 654 F.3d 1012, 1031 (10th Cir. 2011). The BOP, therefore, will be dismissed. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that Defendant Federal Bureau of Prisons will be dismissed from the action. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the claims asserted against Defendants Frank Cordova and George Santini shall be drawn to a presiding judge and when applicable to a magistrate judge.

DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 14th day of April, 2015.

BY THE COURT:

s/Lewis T. Babcock

LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Senior Judge

United States District Court


Summaries of

Gilmore v. Sicotte

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Apr 14, 2015
Civil Action No. 15-cv-00741-GPG (D. Colo. Apr. 14, 2015)
Case details for

Gilmore v. Sicotte

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM GILMORE, Plaintiff, v. TRUDY SICOTTE, PA, DAVID TESSIER, HCA, and…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Apr 14, 2015

Citations

Civil Action No. 15-cv-00741-GPG (D. Colo. Apr. 14, 2015)