United States District Court, W.D. New York
COLIN J. HALEY, Plaintiff,
ASSISTANT FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR TODD L. TRYON, et al., Defendants
For Colin J. Haley, Plaintiff: Anne Marie Wheeler, Marc C. Panepinto, LEAD ATTORNEY, Cantor Dolce & Panepinto PC, Buffalo, NY.
For Todd L. Tryon, Assistant Field Office Director, Michael Philips, Field Office Director, Defendants: Kathryn L. Smith, LEAD ATTORNEY, U.S. Attorney's Office, Rochester, NY.
DAVID G. LARIMER, United States District Judge.
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, an individual formerly detained at the Buffalo Federal Detention Facility in Batavia, New York (" Buffalo Facility" ) brings this action against the Buffalo Facility's Assistant Field Office Director, Todd Tryon (" Tryon" ), Field Office Director Michael Phillips (" Phillips" ) and four non- federal officers who work at the Buffalo Facility. Plaintiff claims that during his detention at the Buffalo Facility, he was assaulted by a cell mate, and that the defendants failed to protect him and denied him proper medical treatment, in violation of his rights pursuant to, inter alia, the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
The two federal defendants, Phillips and Tryon, now move to dismiss the claims against them for failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 12(b)(6). (Dkt. #13). Plaintiff filed a response in opposition to the motion to dismiss, as well as two cross motions for leave to amend
the complaint. (Dkt. #20, #21). The Court appointed counsel for plaintiff on April 16, 2013 (Dkt. #26), and counsel submitted a supplemental response opposing the motion to dismiss.
For the reasons set forth below, the motion to dismiss (Dkt. #13) is granted, plaintiff's cross motions to amend the complaint (Dkt. #20, #21) are denied, and plaintiff's claims against Phillips and Tryon are dismissed.
I. Standard on a Motion to Dismiss
When deciding whether a complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 12(b)(6), the Court must accept the allegations contained in the complaint as true, and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the non-movant." Sheppard v. Beerman, 18 F.3d 147, 150 (2d Cir. 1994), citing Ad-Hoc Comm. of Baruch Black & Hispanic Alumni Ass'n v. Bernard M. Baruch College, 835 F.2d 980, 982 (2d Cir. 1987). However, " a plaintiff's obligation . . . requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do. Factual allegations must be enough ...