Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

16-3338 - BIBBS v. WERTMAN et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
16-3338 - BIBBS v. WERTMAN et al
April 4, 2017
PDF | More
ENTRY Screening Complaint and Directing Further Proceedings - The amended complaint, like the original complaint, lacks any facts upon which the court could conclude that any individual defendant was deliberately indifferent to the plaintiff's need for treatment. Accordingly, the individual defendants are dismissed. The complaint alleges a tort claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671, et seq. ("FTCA"). This claim is against the United States only. Hughes v. United States, 701 F.2d 56, 58 (7th Cir. 1982). The clerk is directed to update the docket to show that all other defendants have been dismissed. All other claims have been dismissed. If the plaintiff believes that additional claims were alleged in the complaint, but not identified by the Court he shall have through April 27, 2017, in which to identify those claims. The clerk is directed to issue a single summons to the United States attorney for this district and the Attorney General of the United States at Washington, D.C., pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1). The Marshal for this District is directed to serve the summons and complaint by registered or certified mail at the expense of the United States. (See Entry.) Copy to William Bibbs via U.S. Mail. cc: USM Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 4/4/2017.(JLS)
September 28, 2017
PDF | More
ENTRY ON MOTION TO DISMISS - 20 Motion to Dismiss is granted. The FTCA is clear that no legal action shall be initiated until the claim process is properly exhausted. Bibbs' FTCA claim is premature because he had not exhausted his administrative remedies at the time this action was filed. For the reasons stated above, the FTCA claim against the United States must be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. No partial final judgment shall issue at this time as to the claims resolved in this Entry. The clerk is directed to update the docket to reflect that the United States is no longer a defendant to this action. See entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/28/2017. (Copy mailed to plaintiff) (MEJ)
September 28, 2017
PDF | More
ENTRY DISCUSSING PENDING MOTIONS- 38 Motion for Copies is granted. The clerk is directed to include a copy of docket numbers 12 and 23, along with the plaintiff's copy of this Entry. 41 Motion for Clerk's Entry of Default is denied. This is because the time to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint was extended through October 25, 2017. See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/28/2017. (Copy mailed to Plaintiff) (MEJ)
March 26, 2018
PDF | More
ORDER granting Defendants' 50 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 56 Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants have shown that Mr. Bibbs did not exhaust his available administrative remedies prior to filing this lawsuit. The consequence of these circumstances, in light of 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), is that this lawsuit should not have been brought and must now be dismissed without prejudice. See Ford, 362 F.3d at 401 (7th Cir. 2004)("We therefore hold that all dismissals under § 1997e(a) should be without prejudice."). Defendant Wilson's motion for summary judgment, dkt. 50, is granted and defendant Koj's motion for summary judgment, dkt. 56, is granted. Mr. Bibb's Motion to Amend dkt. 67 and Dr. Koj's The Motion to Strike dkt. 70 are denied as moot. Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue. (See Order). Copy to Petitioner via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/26/2018. (MAC)