Maldonado v. Giles W. Dalby Correctional Facility, 5:13-cv-00015

Federal prisoner Alejandro Fierro Maldonado, proceeding in forma pauperis, sued Dalby Correctional Facility medical staff alleging deliberate indifference to serious kidney disease and requested specialist referrals (oncology/urology) and biopsy.
Maldonado reported prior hospital evaluation in El Paso (Aug 2012) where he says doctors recommended oncology/urology follow-up; he was transferred to Dalby in Dec 2012 and claims those records were not initially forwarded.
At Dalby, Dr. P. Hanford examined Maldonado soon after transfer, continued prior prescriptions, requested prior records, ordered blood work, urinalysis, and an abdominal scan, and prescribed medications for hypertension, reflux, and constipation.
Dalby records (including El Paso hospital records) show discharge diagnoses of no acute pathology, normal/within-range laboratory and urinalysis results, and an abdominal scan with no abnormalities.
Maldonado disagreed with the medical staff’s refusal to refer him to specialists; he claims ongoing pain, fever, and possible kidney tumor, but Dalby’s documented testing did not indicate a condition requiring specialist referral.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Dalby staff were deliberately indifferent to a serious medical need	Maldonado: diagnosed/possible kidney tumor; needed oncologist/urologist and biopsy; prior hospital recommended specialists	Dalby: provided exams, ordered tests/scans, prescribed meds, requested prior records; tests normal so no speciality referral warranted	Court: No deliberate indifference — records show evaluation and testing; no subjective knowledge of substantial risk
Whether disagreement over treatment rises to Eighth Amendment violation	Maldonado: denial of specialist care despite need	Dalby: treatment decisions were medical judgment based on test results	Court: Mere disagreement with treatment is insufficient; medical judgment and testing rebut deliberate indifference
Whether authenticated medical records defeat § 1983 claim	Maldonado: asserts inadequate care despite records	Dalby: records show ongoing care and normal results	Court: Records rebut allegations; no constitutional violation established
Whether the complaint should be dismissed and counted as a PLRA strike	Maldonado: seeks injunctive relief continuing the suit	Dalby: dismissal appropriate because claim frivolous	Court: Recommend dismissal as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and assess a strike under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)

Corr. Servs. Corp. v. Malesko, 534 U.S. 61 (private prison inmates may seek injunctive relief under § 1983)
Easter v. Powell, 467 F.3d 459 (5th Cir.) (Eighth Amendment deliberate-indifference standard requires subjective awareness of risk)
Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (deliberate indifference to serious medical needs actionable under Eighth Amendment)
Domino v. Tex. Dep’t of Criminal Justice, 239 F.3d 752 (5th Cir.) (deliberate indifference is extremely high standard)
Sama v. Hannigan, 669 F.3d 585 (5th Cir.) (examples of conduct showing deliberate indifference)
Rogers v. Boatright, 709 F.3d 403 (5th Cir.) (disagreement with treatment does not establish deliberate indifference)
Gobert v. Caldwell, 463 F.3d 339 (5th Cir.) (medical disagreement insufficient for § 1983 liability)
Stewart v. Murphy, 174 F.3d 530 (5th Cir.) (negligence or misdiagnosis does not equal Eighth Amendment violation)
Banuelos v. McFarland, 41 F.3d 232 (5th Cir.) (authenticated medical records can rebut deliberate-indifference allegations)
Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383 (5th Cir.) (standard for assessing PLRA strikes)
Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir.) (requirements for specific objections to magistrate judge reports)