Baker v. Ahsan, 100219 FED3, 19-1389

Docket Nº:19-1389
Opinion Judge:PER CURIAM
Party Name:RALPH BAKER, Appellant v. ABU AHSAN, M.D.; IHUMMA NAACHUKU, Medical Doctor; MICHAEL PIECUCH, MD; DR. RUSSELL FEIRD, Urologist St. Francis; STEVEN JOHNSON, Administrator; ST. FRANCIS MEDICAL CENTER UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES; RUTGERS UNIVERSITY; BARMAN VLADISLAV, Medical resident at the University Hospital in Newark, New ...
Judge Panel:Before: AMBRO, KRAUSE and PORTER, Circuit Judges
Case Date:October 02, 2019
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

RALPH BAKER, Appellant

v.

ABU AHSAN, M.D.; IHUMMA NAACHUKU, Medical Doctor; MICHAEL PIECUCH, MD; DR. RUSSELL FEIRD, Urologist St. Francis; STEVEN JOHNSON, Administrator; ST. FRANCIS MEDICAL CENTER UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES; RUTGERS UNIVERSITY; BARMAN VLADISLAV, Medical resident at the University Hospital in Newark, New Jersey; MARCI L. MARSKER, Clinical Administrator at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey ("UMDNJ"); KATHY TRILLO, employee of UMDNJ; NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, NJDOC; GARY M. LANIGAN, Commissioner of NJDOC; JEREMY BURG, A nurse employed by Rutgers; LACE CARTER, A nurse employed by Rutgers; CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, CMS, a provider of inmate healthcare for the NJSP; ALEJANDRINA SUMICAD, Employee of UMDNJ; SUSAN SPANGLER, Employee of UMDNJ; VLADISLAV BARGMAN

No. 19-1389

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

October 2, 2019

NOT PRECEDENTIAL

Submitted for Possible Dismissal Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) or Summary Action Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6 September 19, 2019

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civil Action No. 3-14-cv-07583) District Judge: Honorable Peter G. Sheridan

Before: AMBRO, KRAUSE and PORTER, Circuit Judges

OPINION [*]

PER CURIAM

Ralph Baker appeals the dismissal of his suit for failure to state a claim. Because this case does not present a substantial question, we will summarily affirm. See 3d Cir. L.A.R. 27.4; 3d Cir. I.O.P. 10.6.

Baker filed his complaint and an application to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") in December 2014. The District Court rejected Baker's first two attempts to submit a complaint. Baker filed a third amended complaint ("TAC") in April 2017. Baker alleged that the eighteen named defendants failed to timely diagnose and treat him for a variety of ailments, including prostate cancer, while he was incarcerated. The District Court granted Baker's IFP motion, but partially dismissed several claims and defendants from the action for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). See Dkt. #49. The case moved forward as to the other defendants and claims. Subsequently...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP