Gibson v. John Does 1, 2

Background

Bennie Gibson, who was detained at the North Infirmary Command on Rikers Island, brought this civil-rights action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleged that the defendants violated his federal constitutional rights. The court had previously granted Gibson permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees because it found that his allegations satisfied the imminent-danger exception to the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s three-strikes restriction.

Screening of the claims

Under the federal prisoner-screening statutes, the court had to dismiss claims that were frivolous, malicious, inadequately pleaded, or aimed at a defendant immune from money damages. The court also had to dismiss claims over which it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction.

Gibson named “The City Municipality supervisors, policymakers, trainors, employees.” The court ruled that this was not a suable entity and dismissed the claims against it. Because the complaint showed a clear intention to assert claims against the City of New York, the court directed the Clerk to replace that description with the City of New York in the case caption. The court stated that this amendment was without prejudice to defenses the City might later assert.

Gibson also named several unidentified defendants, including four additional John Does and “Clinical, Med Lab Doctors, from NYC HH personnel.” The court found that he alleged no facts showing how those people were involved in violating his rights and provided no information that would allow the Department of Correction to identify them. It therefore dismissed the claims against those unidentified defendants for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. The court expressly stated that this dismissal was without prejudice to Gibson’s repleading those claims in an amended complaint.

Identifying one John Doe

Gibson provided enough information for the New York City Department of Correction to identify the correction officer whom he alleged assisted Captain Guirdo in spraying him with a chemical agent on June 27 or 28, 2025. Under a procedure allowing a court to help a self-represented litigant identify a defendant, the court ordered the New York City Law Department to determine that officer’s identity, badge number, and service address within 60 days of the order.

Within 30 days after receiving that information, Gibson must file an amended complaint naming the newly identified defendant. The amended complaint will replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court will screen the amended complaint and may later request that the newly identified defendant waive service.

Service and discovery

The court requested that the City of New York, the Warden of the North Infirmary Command, the Deputy Warden, and Captain Guirdo waive service of summons. It directed the Clerk to notify the New York City Department of Correction and the New York City Law Department about the order.

The court also ruled that Local Civil Rule 33.2 applies. Within 120 days after service of the complaint, the defendants must respond to the standard prisoner-case interrogatories and document requests, quoting each request verbatim in the responses.

Disposition

Judge Edgardo Ramos dismissed Gibson’s claims against the John and Jane Doe defendants, the “Clinical, Med Lab Doctors, from NYC HH personnel,” and “The City Municipality supervisors, policy makers, trainors, employees” for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. The Clerk was directed to add the City of New York as a defendant, amend the caption, and mail Gibson an information package. The order also directed the identification process for one John Doe and confirmed that the case is subject to Local Civil Rule 33.2.