Ramirez v. Southern Health Partners, No. 3:2017cv00133 - Document 9 (W.D. Ky. 2017)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION by Senior Judge Thomas B. Russell; 30-day period has expired, and the record reflects that Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. Court will enter a separate Order dismissing this actioncc:counsel, Plaintiff (MLG)

Download PDF
Ramirez v. Southern Health Partners Doc. 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION TARRIKE T. RAMIREZ PLAINTIFF v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17CV-P133-TBR SOUTHERN HEALTH PARTNERS DEFENDANT MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Tarrike T. Ramirez, a convicted inmate incarcerated in the Hardin County Detention Center (HCDC), filed a pro se complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Southern Health Partners (SHP). By Memorandum Opinion and Order entered September 29, 2017 (DN 8), the Court conducted an initial review of the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and dismissed the claims against the sole Defendant, SHP, pursuant to § 1915A(b)(1) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Before dismissing the entire action, however, the Court provided Plaintiff with an opportunity to file an amended complaint to name as Defendants any officers/employees/medical staff allegedly involved in Plaintiff’s claims of denied medical treatment at HCDC, to sue them in their individual capacity, and to describe what each Defendant allegedly did to violate his rights. See LaFountain v. Harry, 716 F.3d 944, 951 (6th Cir. 2013) (“[U]nder Rule 15(a) a district court can allow a plaintiff to amend his complaint even when the complaint is subject to dismissal under the PLRA [Prison Litigation Reform Act].”). The Court advised Plaintiff that his failure to file an amended complaint within 30 days from entry of the Memorandum Opinion and Order would result in the entry of a final Order dismissing the entire action for the reasons stated therein. Dockets.Justia.com The 30-day period has expired, and the record reflects that Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. Therefore, the Court will enter a separate Order dismissing this action. Date: November 29, 2017 cc: Plaintiff, pro se Defendant 4413.005 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.