United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Roanoke Division
October 22, 2014
JORDAN JOSEPH KINARD, Plaintiff,
GREGORY HOLLOWAY, ET AL., Defendants.
Jordan Joseph Kinard, Pro Se Plaintiff.
JAMES P. JONES, District Judge.
Plaintiff Jordan Joseph Kinard once again asks the court to direct his doctors what medical treatment to prescribe. As I have said repeatedly in denying Kinard's previous motions for interlocutory injunctive relief, this piecemeal litigation style will not be tolerated, and Kinard's current motion must be summarily denied.
Kinard now alleges that for three weeks, he has received no pain medication or other treatment for his shoulder pain. He claims, however, that a doctor (not a party to this lawsuit) examined him on October 13, 2014, and said nothing further could be done for his pain. Because Kinard clearly has not had time to exhaust available administrative remedies regarding these allegations, he is not entitled to bring legal action in this court. 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Moreover, Kinard is clearly receiving medical evaluation and simply disagrees with his doctor's treatment decision. As such, he has not demonstrated any likelihood of success on the merits of his newly minted claim against this physician. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 102 (1976) (finding that Eighth Amendment claim requires showing of deliberate indifference to serious medical need); Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008) (authorizing interlocutory injunctive relief only if plaintiff demonstrates, among other things, "that he is likely to succeed on the merits"). Finally, Kinard's current request for interlocutory injunctive relief is not properly filed in this civil action, as it is not directed at the current defendants. For these reasons, Kinard's request for interlocutory relief will be denied.
A separate order will be entered.