Olibencia v. Melecio, 9:24-cv-00215

Gilberto Olibencia, an incarcerated pro se plaintiff, filed a Section 1983 action asserting Eighth Amendment claims for inadequate medical care while housed at Wallkill Correctional Facility.
Plaintiff alleges he suffered from multiple severe medical conditions, repeatedly requested medical attention, and was denied or delayed necessary care by prison medical staff.
After shoulder surgery at Montefiore Mount Vernon Hospital, Olibencia claims to have contracted a serious infection due to alleged staff negligence at the hospital.
Plaintiff asserts that three Wallkill officials (Superintendent Melecio, Medical Director Gettler, Nurse Administrator Gilleo) failed to respond adequately to his grievances and urgent medical needs, resulting in worsening health and delayed prostate cancer diagnosis.
The original and amended complaints named both prison officials and unidentified hospital personnel (John/Jane Does); the State Attorney General subsequently identified certain defendants.
The Court reviewed the amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B), 1915A(b), conducting an initial sua sponte screening for legal sufficiency.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Section 1983 state action by hospital	Hospital staff's actions constituted actionable deprivation	Hospital is a private entity, not state actors	Dismissed—no plausible state action by hospital staff
Eleventh Amendment immunity	NY State and officials liable for monetary damages	State and official defendants are immune	Dismissed—barred by Eleventh Amendment
Eighth Amendment medical indifference	Officials were deliberately indifferent to serious needs	(No argument yet; initial review)	Claims against Melecio, Gettler, Gilleo survive review
Official vs. individual capacity claims	Relief sought against State and individuals in both capacities	Official capacity claims valid under Section 1983	Only individual capacity claims allowed; others dismissed

Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (complaint is frivolous if it lacks arguable basis in law or fact)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (plausibility standard for pleadings; legal conclusions not accepted as true)
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (complaint must state a plausible claim to survive dismissal)