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.

Stanton v. Chano

United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Northern Division

January 21, 2015

DUSTIN STANTON, PLAINTIFF
v.
MICHAELA CHANO and SANDRA SIURANO, DEFENDANTS

Dustin Stanton, Plaintiff, Pro se, Nashville, TN.

For Michaela Chano, Nurse, Defendant: Samuel Lynn Murray, LEAD ATTORNEY, U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE - Jackson, Jackson, MS.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Michael T. Parker, United States Magistrate Judge.

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant Michaela Chano's Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative, for Summary Judgment [45] and sua sponte for case management purposes following Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's Order [55] regarding Defendant Sandra Siurano's address. Having considered Defendant Chano's Motion [45] and the applicable law, the undersigned recommends that the Motion [45] be denied. Additionally, the undersigned recommends that Defendant Sandra Siurano be dismissed from this action without prejudice.

Defendant Sandra Siurano

On November 13, 2013, the Court directed the clerk to issue process to Defendants, including Sandra Siurano. See Order [19]. The United States Marshals Service, however, was unable to serve Siurano because she no longer works for the Federal Bureau of Prisons (" BOP"). See Summons Return [22]. In order to complete service, the Court ordered BOP to produce the last known address of Siurano. See Order [27]. BOP provided an address, but the Marshals Service again was unable to serve Siurano because she no longer lives at that address. See Summons Return [39].

On September 29, 2014, the Court directed Plaintiff to provide the Court with an address where Siurano may be served with process. See Order [55]. The Court advised Plaintiff that if he failed to provide an address for Siurano by October 17, 2014, she would be dismissed from this action without prejudice. To date, Plaintiff has failed to provide an address where Siurano may be served with process or otherwise serve her with process. Accordingly, the undersigned recommends that Defendant Siurano be dismissed from the action without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m).

Defendant Michaela Chano's Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative, for Summary Judgment

Background

Plaintiff Dustin Stanton is a federal inmate currently incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary in Tucson, Arizona. Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this Bivens [1] civil rights action on September 3, 2013, alleging that his Eighth Amendment right to be free from " cruel and unusual punishment" was violated during his incarceration at the Federal Correctional Complex in Yazoo City, Mississippi. Plaintiff alleges that on March 28, 2012, he had an operation to remove cysts from his sinuses. Upon returning to prison, Plaintiff alleges that he was not cared for properly by the medical staff, and that this resulted in a severe nose bleed and a subsequent surgery on his left carotid artery to remove a blood clot.

In regard to Defendant Michaela Chano, Plaintiff alleges:

After about [two and a half] hours after his return to the prison, Plaintiff began to bleed uncontrolably [sic] 'Choking' on his blood as the packing stopped the blood from flowing from his nose. Plaintiff went to the infirmary at the prison where Nurse Chano laid him on a medical bed. The blood and or bleeding slowed down but did not stop. R/N Chano failed to examine Plaintiff but after 10 minutes told him he would be okay and he needed to return to this housing unit. By the time Plaintiff returned to his housing unit he was once again bleeding profusely from his right side nose and mouth.

See Complaint [1] at 5.

On July 11, 2014, Defendant Chano filed her Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative, for Summary Judgment [45] arguing that Plaintiff's claim should be dismissed for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), that Plaintiff's claim should be dismissed based upon qualified immunity for failure to establish a constitutional violation and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ...


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.