Name of Assigned Judge Virginia M. Kendall Sitting Judge if Other or Magistrate Judge than Assigned Judge
Plaintiff may proceed with his amended complaint  against the following Defendants: Wexford Health Sources, Kevin Halloran, Dr. Partha Ghosh, Dr. Liping Zhang, Dr. R. Shute, Dr. Latoya Williams, and Dr. Aguinaldo. The clerk shall issue summonses for service of the amended complaint  on these Defendants. The other Defendants are dismissed.
O [For further details see text below.] Docketing to mail notices.
Plaintiff Bernard Mims (R-55072), an inmate at the Stateville Correctional Center, has paid the $350 filing fee and has filed an amended complaint in accordance with the Court's September 28, 2011, order. The Court's preliminary review of the amended complaint, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, reveals that Plaintiff may proceed against some, but not all, of the 15 Defendants he lists. Plaintiff alleges that he hurt his hand in 2007. Dr. Agunaldo examined the hand, informed Plaintiff that it appeared that a broken bone had healed improperly, but did nothing more for Plaintiff's complaints of pain. Plaintiff then saw Dr. Liping Zhang, who ordered an X-ray, which revealed a fracture of the 4th and 5th metacarpal, which had healed improperly. Plaintiff was also seen by Physician Assistant Latoya Williams, who commented that the hand looked deformed and who recommended an MRI, which was never taken. Plaintiff states that Dr. Zhang, Dr. Ghosh, and Dr. Shute also recommended an MRI, but Wexford would not approve it. Plaintiff alleges that all these doctors refused to prescribe medication for pain, despite Plaintiff's repeated complaints of pain.
With respect to Wexford Health Sources, the company hired to provide medical services to Illinois inmates and which employs the Stateville's doctors, Plaintiff states that he wrote letters to Wexford and its Chief Executive Officer Kevin Halloran about the lack of treatment he was receiving, his need for an MRI, and his complaints of pain; however, nothing was done. Plaintiff names additional Wexford officials as Defendants, but does not state how they were involved.
With respect to Stateville Warden Marcus Hardy, Plaintiff states that Hardy could have intervened to ensure that proper medical care was being given, but did not.
Plaintiff further alleges that he submitted several grievances that were never processed, thus preventing him from exhausting his administrative remedies. Plaintiff names Sarah Johnson, Salvador Godinez, and an unknown person referred to Jane Doe with respect to his claims that his grievances were not handled properly.
Lastly, Plaintiff asserts that Nurse Encarnacion examined him but ignored Plaintiff's high blood pressure.
Having conducted a preliminary review of the amended complaint, see 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Plaintiff may proceed against Drs. Ghosh, Zhang, Aguinaldo, Shute, Williams, as well as Wexford and Kevin Halloran. Plaintiff alleges that he complained of pain and the need for further treatment of his hand for a bone that healed improperly, but that the doctors provided neither medication for the pain nor additional treatment. See Roe v. Elyea, 631 F.3d 843, 858 (7th Cir. 2011); Hayes v. Snyder, 546 F.3d 516, 524 (7th Cir. 2008) (inadequate response to complaints of pain can establish deliberate indifference to a serious medical need). Plaintiff may also proceed against Wexford and Halloran, who allegedly not only ignored Plaintiff's letters about not getting treatment but also refused recommendations that Plaintiff receive an MRI. Hayes, 546 F.3d at 527 (a failure to investigate complaints of insufficient medical care can rise to the level of deliberate indifference).
With respect to Warden Hardy, however, Plaintiff does not state that he informed Hardy of the need for better medical care. Rather, Plaintiff's assertions against Hardy indicate that Hardy is named only in his role as a supervisory official, "the highest office . . . at Stateville" with "the final say on any & everything that goes on . . .in the institution." (Amended Compl. at 7.) A supervisory official cannot be held vicariously liable for the actions of subordinate employees, but must have been personally involved in some way. See J.H. ex rel. Higgin v. Johnson , 346 F.3d 788, 793 (7th Cir. 2003) . Although Plaintiff makes general assertions that inadequate health care is the norm at Stateville, which arguably suggests an unconstitutional custom or policy, Plaintiff's claims of inadequate care center on Wexford's indifference, as opposed to the prison's. Plaintiff's assertions against Hardy are thus insufficient to state a claim against him.
With respect to Sarah Johnson, Salvador Godinez, and the unnamed grievance officer, Plaintiff asserts only that these Defendants failed to process his grievances, which does not state a valid § 1983 claim. Greeno v. Daley, 414 F.3d 645, 656 (7th Cir. 2005), citing Durmer v. O'Carroll, 991 F.2d 64, 69 (3d Cir. 1993); see also Antonelli v. Sheahan, 81 F.3d 1422, 1430 (7th Cir. 1996).
Lastly, with respect to Nurse Encarnacion, Plaintiff names her for failing to diagnose or treat his high blood pressure. This claim, however, is unrelated to his claim about his hand asserted against the other Defendants. Under George v. Smtih, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007), "[u]nrelated claims against different defendants belong in different suits." Plaintiff's claim about his high blood pressure ...