The opinion of the court was delivered by: Reagan, District Judge
The Court's March 2009 Order thoroughly summarized the facts and procedural history of this case. That history need not be repeated in detail here. Kelvin Lee Marion proceeds on a Bivens claim pertaining to the conditions of his former confinement at FCI-Greenville. His July 2007 amended complaint named two Defendants:
(1) Darlene Veltri, Warden of FCI-Greenville from January 2003 to February 2005, and
(2) Timothy Adesanya, a Physician's Assistant at FCI-Greenville.
Remaining for disposition is Marion's claim that Veltri and Adesanya
(Defendants) responded with deliberate indifference to Marion's serious medical need for "soft shoes" between August 9, 2000 and November 17, 2004, thereby violating the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.
Now before the Court fully briefed is Defendants' April 23, 2009 motion for summary judgment, with supporting materials filed by Defendants plus a brief in opposition filed by Plaintiff Marion (Docs. 44, 51).
Summary judgment is appropriate where the pleadings, the discovery and disclosure materials on file, and any affidavits "show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 56(c). Accord O'Neal v. City of Chicago, 2009 WL 3818252, *1 (7th Cir. Nov. 17, 2009); Dale v. Poston, 548 F.3d 563, 568-69 (7th Cir. 2008).
In the context of Defendants' motion, the undersigned Judge views the record in the light most favorable to Marion (the nonmoving party) and draws in Marion's favor all reasonable inferences. Hollins v. City of Milwaukee, 574 F.3d 822, 826 (7th Cir. 2009), citing Darst v. Interstate Brands Corp., 512 F.3d 903, 907 (7th Cir. 2008). However, to defeat summary judgment, the nonmoving party (Marion) must do more than raise a metaphysical doubt as to the material facts. Instead, he "must come forward with specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." Keri v. Board of Trustees of Purdue Univ., 458 F.3d 620, 628 (7th Cir. 2006), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1210 (2007), citingMatsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586 (1986).
Stated another way, this Court can find a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment "only if sufficient evidence favoring the nonmoving party exists to permit a jury to return a verdict for that party." Argyropoulos v. City of Alton, 539 F.3d 724, 731 (7th Cir. 2008), quoting Sides v. City of Champaign, 496 F.3d 820, 826 (7th Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 128 S.Ct. 1450 (2008). Bearing these standards in mind, the Court assesses the record before it, having carefully reviewed the materials submitted by the parties.
A preliminary matter bears note. Defendants rely in part on the affidavit of Dr. Thomas Dawdy, Clinical Director at FCI-Greenville (Doc. 44-3). Portions of this affidavit appear to be based on Dr. Dawdy's personal knowledge of procedures in the health services unit. To the extent that Dr. Dawdy relates information beyond his personal knowledge, those statements have not been considered. FED.R.CIV.P.56(e).
Viewed in Marion's favor, the evidence may be summarized as follows. Marion arrived at FCI-Greenville in August 2000. He had symptoms of foot discomfort at that time. A physician's assistant performed a physical examination and noticed that plaintiff had flat feet, a condition in which the arches of the feet have lowered and flattened out. Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary, p. 684 (29th ed. 2000). The examiner also measured Marion's height and weight and assessed obesity.
At FCI-Greenville, individuals working in the laundry are responsible for issuing standard footwear to inmates. Someone working in the laundry issued standard footwear (boots) to Marion. The boots had steel toes and were ill-fitting.
On August 14, 2000, Marion sought medical care for his foot ailment. Defendant Adesanya advised Marion to sign up for ...