United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
D. MARIANI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Tyrone Martin, ("Martin"), an inmate who, at all
relevant times, was housed at the State Correctional
Institution at Smithfield, Pennsylvania
("SCI-Smithfield"), initiated the above-captioned
civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc.
1). Named as Defendants are the Secretary of the Department
of Corrections ("DOC"), Correct Care Solution,
Kevin Barger, Samuel Bickel, Brent Dickson, William
Dreibelbis, Bradd Fazenbaker, Susan Gaff, Ryan Kanagy, Kevin
Kauffman, Matthew Morrison, Timothy Myers, John Neumann, and
Melissa Ross. (Id.). Presently pending before the
Court is a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 12(b) by Defendant Ross. (Doc. 37). For the
reasons set forth below, the Court will grant the motion to
Standard of Review
complaint must be dismissed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), if
it does not allege "enough facts to state a claim to
relief that is plausible on its face." BellAtl.
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167
L.Ed.2d 929 (2007). The plaintiff must aver "factual
content that allows the court to draw the reasonable
inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct
alleged." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 129
S.Ct. 1937, 1949, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009).
a complaint 'does not need detailed factual allegations,
... a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of
action will not do.'" DelRio-Mocci v. Connolly
Prop. Inc., 672 F.3d 241, 245 (3d Cir. 2012) (citing
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). In other words,
"[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right
to relief above the speculative level." Covington v.
Int'lAss'n of Approved Basketball Officials, 710
F.3d 114, 118 (3d Cir. 2013) (internal citations and
quotation marks omitted). A court "take[s] as true all
the factual allegations in the Complaint and the reasonable
inferences that can be drawn from those facts, but...
disregard[s] legal conclusions and threadbare recitals of the
elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory
statements." Ethypharm S.A. France v. Abbott
Laboratories, 707 F.3d 223, 231, n.14 (3d Cir. 2013)
(internal citations and quotation marks omitted).
and Iqbal require [a district court] to take the
following three steps to determine the sufficiency of a
complaint: First, the court must take note of the elements a
plaintiff must plead to state a claim. Second, the court
should identify allegations that, because they are no more
than conclusions, are not entitled to the assumption of
truth. Finally, where there are well-pleaded factual
allegations, a court should assume their veracity and then
determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement
for relief. Connelly v. Steel Valley Sen. Dist, 706
F.3d 209, 212 (3d Cir. 2013).
the well-pleaded facts do not permit the court to infer more
than the mere possibility of misconduct, the complaint has
alleged - but it has not show[n] - that the pleader is
entitled to relief." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679
(internal citations and quotation marks omitted). This
"plausibility" determination will be a
"context-specific task that requires the reviewing court
to draw on its judicial experience and common sense."
even "if a complaint is subject to Rule 12(b)(6)
dismissal, a district court must permit a curative amendment
unless such an amendment would be inequitable or
futile." Phillips v. Cnty. of Allegheny, 515
F.3d 224, 245 (3d Cir. 2008).
[E]ven when plaintiff does not seek leave to amend his
complaint after a defendant moves to dismiss it, unless the
district court finds that amendment would be inequitable or
futile, the court must inform the plaintiff that he or she
has leave to amend the complaint within a set period of time.
Allegations of the Complaint 
alleges that he was attacked by several correctional officers
at SCI-Smithfield on May 5, 2015. (Doc. 1). The complaint
asserts that Correct Care Solutions is an outside company
that provides health care services to inmates and
subcontracts work to other medical providers. (Doc. 1, p. 3,
¶ 14; Doc. 1, pp. 5-6). As to Defendant Ross, Martin
alleges the following:
Melissa Ross is the x-ray technician who acted maliciously as
she tried to cover up plaintiffs injuries caused by
defendants ... Although deliberate indifference is clear this
defendants action remain just as serious if not worst that
those who assaulted plaintiff. And of 5-7-15 defendants
falsified documents creating a paper trail (exhibit 22) ...