BLD-175 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 21-3263 ___________ HILTON KARRIEM MINCY, Appellant v. GOVERNOR OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA; SECRETARY PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; SUPERINTENDENT OF SCE-HUNTINGDON; SECRETARY FOR THE PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH; KOHLER, Deputy Superintendent for Facilities Management SCI- Huntingdon; WALTERS, Deputy Superintendent for Centralized Services SCI- Huntingdon; WALTER HOUSE, Major of the Guard SCI-Huntingdon; CRYSTAL LOY, Major of Unit Management SCI-Huntingdon; M. GOSS, Unit Manager SCI-Huntingdon ____________________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (M.D. Pa. Civil Action No. 1-20-cv-00717) District Judge: Honorable Christopher C. Conner ____________________________________ 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 June 16, 2022 Before: MCKEE, GREENAWAY, JR., and PORTER, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: September 9, 2022) _________ OPINION * _________ PER CURIAM Hilton Mincy, proceeding pro se, appeals an order of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania dismissing his civil rights action. For the reasons that follow, we will affirm the judgment of the District Court. In April 2020, Mincy, who was then incarcerated at SCI-Huntingdon in Pennsylvania, filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Commonwealth and prison officials and prison employees arising from his conditions of confinement during the COVID-19 pandemic. In his second amended complaint, Mincy alleged that prison policies and practices were inadequate and failed to prevent the spread of COVID-19. He averred, among other things, that the policies did not mandate testing staff and inmates for the virus. He also averred that, contrary to the policies that were established, inmates interacted with inmates outside of their cohorts and staff failed to properly wear personal protective equipment. Mincy alleged that the inadequate policies and practices resulted in the lock down of the prison in April 2020. He stated that he became infected with COVID-19 at that time and suffered various symptoms, including a fever, shortness of breath, and an * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. 2 irregular heartbeat. He also exhibited COVID-19 symptoms in June 2020. Mincy claimed that the defendants acted with deliberate indifference to his health and violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. He sought injunctive and declaratory relief, nominal and punitive damages, and the costs of his suit. The District Court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. It ruled that Mincy had failed to plead facts suggesting that the defendants were deliberately indifferent to the risk of harm presented by COVID-19. The District Court denied Mincy’s motion to file a third amended complaint and concluded that further amendment would be futile. This appeal followed. 1 In February 2022, Mincy was released from SCI-Huntingdon. According to the defendants, he was released to a community corrections facility. He currently resides in California. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Because …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals