Free Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 TERRY GODDARD ATTORNEY GENERAL 2 ANNE STRATMAN (022301) 3 Assistant Attorney General 177 North Church Avenue, Suite 1105 4 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1114 (520) 628-6044 · Fax (520) 628-6050 5 [email protected] 6 Attorneys for Defendants 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Defendants Terry Allred, Susan Buffington, Gene Greeley, Kim Kumar, Michael v. QUIRINO VALEROS, et al., Defendants. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA PAUL EUGENE RHODES, Plaintiff, No. CV04-0644 PHX-JAT (MS) REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

17 Lesac, Gary Pinkstaff, Richard Pratt, David Rivas, Bruce Shiflet, and Vern Strubeck, by 18 and through undersigned counsel, reply to Plaintiff Rhodes' response to Defendants' 19 summary judgment motion as follows. 20 Plaintiff's Response does not add any issue of material fact sufficient to overcome

21 summary judgment. The Response simply reiterates Plaintiff's previous arguments--that 22 prison medical providers failed to monitor and treat his skin condition, that he was never 23 allowed a dermatologist consultation, and that the medications that he was prescribed for 24 other ailments made his skin condition worse. Plaintiff's Response describes specific 25 incidents of alleged delays and failures in treatment, such as that certain prescribed 26 medications were delayed, and that almost a year went by between his dermatologist

Case 2:04-cv-00644-JAT-LOA

Document 75

Filed 03/23/2006

Page 1 of 2

1 consultations. (Dkt. 74 at 1.) But none of these incidents alter the undisputed material 2 facts of this case--that Plaintiff visited prison health care providers for his skin condition 3 at least twenty-five times during the approximate three and a half year period relevant to 4 his Complaint and was treated and prescribed medications almost every time, that his 5 condition was evaluated by a dermatologist twice, that Defendants and other prison 6 officials responded to his complaints regarding his skin condition dozens of times, and 7 that regardless of the treatment he received, Plaintiff's skin condition is likely to persist to 8 some extent throughout his lifetime. 9 These undisputed facts clearly establish that Defendants provided adequate medical

10 care to Plaintiff for his skin condition, and therefore that they were not deliberately 11 indifferent to Plaintiff's serious medical needs. 12 Judgment Motion should be granted. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 COPY of the foregoing mailed day of March, 2006 to: this 23 21 Paul Eugene Rhodes, #163870 22 ASPC-Florence-Central Post Office Box 8200 23 Florence AZ 85232 24 25 26 s/CBailey Secretary, Attorney General's Office s/Anne Stratman ANNE STRATMAN Assistant Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 23 day of March, 2006. Therefore, Defendants' Summary

TERRY GODDARD ATTORNEY GENERAL

IDS05-0164 / 952236

Case 2:04-cv-00644-JAT-LOA

Document 75

2

Filed 03/23/2006

Page 2 of 2