francisco supermax emergency motion

7/27/2019 Francisco Supermax Emergency Motion

1/33

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 12-cv-01570-RPM

HAROLD CUNNINGHAM,

CARLTON DUNBAR,

JOHN W. NARDUCCI, JR.,

JEREMY PINSON

JOHN J. POWERSERNEST NORMAN SHAIFER,

and MARCELLUS WASHINGTON,

each individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

and

CENTER FOR LEGAL ADVOCACY

D.B.A. THE LEGAL CENTER FOR PEOPLEWITH DISABILITIES AND OLDER PEOPLE,

COLORADOS PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY SYSTEM,

Plaintiffs,

v.

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS

Defendant.

EMERGENCY MOTION BY PLAINTIFF, CENTER FOR LEGAL ADVOCACY,

FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDERING DEFENDANT TO TRANSFER

ADX PRISONER, JONATHAN FRANCISCO, FOR A MEDICAL EVALUATION

AND TREATMENT

Pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 65 and 42 U.S.C. 10807(b), Plaintiff Center for Legal Advocacy

(CLA) respectfully moves for entry of an Order directing Defendant Federal Bureau of Prisons

Case 1:12-cv-01570-RPM-MEH Document 99 Filed 09/30/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 33


2/33

2

(BOP) to transfer Jonathan Francisco (Francisco), a federal prisoner currently housed at the

United States Penitentiary Administrative Maximum in Florence, Colorado (ADX) to a

suitable federal or private mental health facility for a mental health evaluation and treatment.

I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF REQUESTED RELIEF

CLA brings this emergency motion pursuant to its federal authority found at 42 U.S.C.

10807(b), to protect Francisco from imminent and serious harm that he is exposed to at ADX.

Francisco has been incarcerated at ADX since September 2011. He is a member of the Plaintiff

Class in this action, and is also one of the CLA constituents identified in Plaintiffs First

Amended Complaint. Acting as his representative at the request of his attorney-in-fact and

mother, Linda Embrack, CLA seeks a preliminary injunction for emergency relief on the grounds

that Francisco requires immediate mental health evaluation and treatment for his severe and

persistent life-threatening mental health needs, which are being ignored at ADX.

As demonstrated in the attached declarations and other evidence, for nearly five years

Francisco has displayed a persistent pattern of bizarre and worrisome signs and symptoms

suggesting that he suffers from a severe and worsening mental illness. During that time, he has

been almost entirely mute, speaking very little, if any, to anyone, including family members with

whom he previously had a close relationship. He spends most of his time standing with his face

very near a wall, staring blankly at the surface before him. He also obsessively hoards and

handles his own feces, placing it on food trays, rolling it into balls, making sculptures out of it,

and smearing it on his walls and sometimes on his body or in his hair. He has repeatedly

defecated in common-use shower facilities, and on at least one occasion has been seen

consuming his feces. In addition, he often has little if any personal property in his cell,



3/33

3

frequently sleeps without even a mattress, and continuously lives in unsanitary conditions

verging on squalor. Despite all of this, BOP records reflect that he receives no meaningful

ongoing mental health treatment; instead, the BOPs mental health professionals essentially

ignore him. The available evidence suggests that the BOPs response to his situation, thus far,

has been to occasionally force him into a shower stall, and to pile sandbags outside his door in a

futile effort to prevent the overwhelming smell of feces emanating from his cell from spreading

throughout the part of the prison where he lives.

These conditions would be cause for serious concern in any context, or at any time, but

two recent events involving other prisoners with severe mental illness at ADX demonstrate that

the medical and mental health staff at ADX are either unwilling or unable to detect impending

mental health emergencies. In one recent case, the BOP allowed a psychotic prisoner named

Richie Hill to develop severe malnutrition and systemic staph infections so severe that he was on

the verge of death when the BOP finally evacuated him on an emergency basis to a medical

facility in November 2012. Like Francisco, Hill spent months in a feces-encrusted cell before

the BOP finally addressed his serious medical needs. In a more recent case, the BOP ignored

obvious signs of acute psychosis on the part of ADX prisoner Robert Knott, who hung himself in

his cell at ADX on September 7, 2013, after languishing at ADX for years with only intermittent

care for his schizophrenia. Both of these incidents occurred after this case was filed, when the

BOP knew Plaintiffs and this Court were watching, and both resulted from inexcusable and

unconstitutional neglect.

The BOPs catastrophic errors in managing and treating the mental illness of Messers.

Hill and Knott make it clear that the BOP cannot be trusted to monitor and manage severely



4/33

4

compromised prisoners at ADX, despite the improvements supposedly made following the

institution of this lawsuit. Moreover, those errors make clear that when a prisoner is in serious

distress because of serious mental illness it may be necessary for the Court to protect him from

the persistent deficiencies in the ADX mental health system, because the BOP lacks the

inclination and/or ability to address the situation itself.

The evidence of Franciscos plight is manifest, and the risk to his health and life is

obvious and imminent. In order to avoid repetition of the Hill and Knott catastrophes, the Court

should enter an emergency order requiring the BOP to transfer Francisco to a facility where he

can be competently evaluated and treated, and where consideration can be given to the

management of his hygiene and behavior in a manner that protects his health and that of

prisoners in proximity to him.

II. SUMMARY OF MATERIAL FACTS

A. The Treatment Of Mentally Ill Prisoners at ADX Violates the Eighth

Amendment.

This Motion comes in the context of a class action brought by seriously mentally ill

prisoners at ADX and a separate action brought by CLA. Starting in July 2011 and continuing to

the present, Plaintiffs counsel has conducted an investigation into the policies and practices in

place at ADX regarding the treatment of mentally ill prisoners. The original Complaint was filed

on June 19, 2012. An Amended Complaint was filed on May 23, 2013 (Compl.). The

Amended Complaint alleges violations by the BOP and several of its senior officials of both

BOPs own policies with respect to mental health issues and the constitutional rights of many

prisoners housed at ADX. In particular, and as detailed in the Amended Complaint, many of the

prisoners housed at ADX suffer from various forms of serious mental illness, including Major



5/33

5

Depression, Schizophrenia, Bipolar Illness, Schizoaffective Disorder, various personality

disorders with significant functional impairments, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, severe

developmental or other mental disabilities, and other chronic and serious mental conditions.

Compl. 55. These mental conditions are described and defined more completely in the

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). Id.1

Although

all such prisoners require and are constitutionally entitled to treatment for their mental illnesses,

the ADX systematically denies them such treatment. Two recent and glaring examples of these

systemic deficiencies are summarized below.

At any given time, between 400 and 500 prisoners are housed at ADX in nine different

maximum-security housing units, which are divided into six security levels, and include the

disciplinary Special Housing Unit (also called Charlie Unit, Zulu Unit, the SHU, or the

Hole). Compl. 25, 28. All ADX prisoners live in severe isolation Compl. 26 Conditions

in the SHU are worse, however. In particular, prisoners confined to the SHU are continuously

segregated from other prisoners, even during recreation. Compl. 28. Id. Unlike other ADX

prisoners, those in the SHU are denied access to televisions, few even have access to radios, and

most are restricted with respect to possessing personal property that other ADX prisoners can

possess and use, such as clothing, reading material and art supplies. See id. Thus, many SHU

prisoners are confined with nothing in their cells but a mattress and minimal clothing (for

example, a t-shirt and boxer shorts). Id. These austere conditions are a psychological challenge

1Effective May 18, 2013, the DSM-5 replaced the DSM IV TR, which was cited in the

Amended Complaint. This change does not impact any aspect of the Plaintiffs claims, althoughit will affect how some illnesses involved in this case are categorized and discussed.



6/33

6

for the healthiest prisoners; for the severely mentally ill they can be devastating. Compl. 42-

46.

B. Francisco Is In Obvious And Immediate Need Of Mental Health Treatment.

Francisco is 29 years old. Compl. 321. Before his incarceration he lived in Tennessee.

Id. He is currently serving extended sentences for unlawful weapons possession and murdering a

fellow prisoner at the United States Penitentiary in Pollack, Louisiana. Id. He has a release date

of May 29, 2040. Id.

Francisco arrived at ADX in late 2011. Compl. at 322. As detailed below, shortly after

Franciscos arrival at the ADX other prisoners in the ADX SHU began to notice his bizarre

behavior. Id. Among other things, he has barely spoken a word to anyone in the nearly 18

months since arriving at ADX; rather, he spends all day, every day, staring at the wall of his cell.

Id. He frequently defecates on the floor of his cell or on a food tray, and smears his feces on

himself, his cell or his other surroundings. Id. He ignores other prisoners attempts to help him,

does not communicate with staff, and makes no effort to maintain his health or hygiene. Id. As

a result, he lives in squalor, rarely eats and is showered only when ADX staff members force him

into a shower enclosure. Id.

Plaintiffs counsel learned about Francisco from other prisoners in late 2011, and began

investigating his background. A review of court filings revealed a letter that his mother sent to

his original sentencing judge in 2010 noting that when she visited Francisco on March 7, 2010,

his hair was matted, he was very underweight, he appeared to be over medicated, he

couldnt talk, his balance was unstable, and he appeared unable to recognize [his mother]



7/33

7

and his little sister[S]halina. See id.; see also Exh. Q hereto. By all appearances, his condition

has deteriorated since his arrival at ADX.

The attached declarations confirm that Francisco has converted his cell into a barren cube

decorated only with garbage and his own feces. As inmates housed near him have observed,

Francisco persistently spreads feces everywhere in his cell, on the floor, walls, sink and bars,

pushes his feces out into the range outside his cell, and smears feces on his body and in his hair.

Mallett Decl., Exh. B, at 3; Clark Decl., Exh. D, at 9; Trigg Decl., Exh. A, at 9; Barron

Decl., Exh. F, at 10 and 13; Jones Decl., Exh. G, at 6; Orr Decl., Exh. I, at 6; Shryock Decl.,

Exh. K, at 3. At various points Franciscos cell has been littered not only with feces but with

discarded styrofoam food trays and rotten food. Pinson Decl., Exh. E, at 5. He also

obsessively plays with feces, building little castles and making other shapes, Mallett Decl.,

Exh. B, at 14; Bruce Decl., Exh. C, at 5 (describing small feces snowman that Francisco left

in a communal shower); Pinson Decl., Exh. E, at 5 (describing small feces sculptures made by

Francisco in the shape of small people or maybe a Buddha); see also Trigg Decl., Exh. A, at

11 (describing Francisco placing small feces balls on his food tray); Orr Decl., Exh. I, at 7

(Francisco almost always keeps a ball of feces on his desk.). Francisco has also been seen

with feces in his mouth, Mallett Decl., Exh. B, at 14, and in the act of eating his feces, Dep. Of

R. Hill, Vol. 2, Exh. N hereto, at Pgs. 96 and 144-45. To make matters worse, Francisco rarely if

ever showers, even when he is housed in a cell that has a shower in it. Bruce Decl., Exh. C, at

10; Orr Decl., Exh. I, at 4.

The deplorable conditions in which Francisco frequently exists are detailed especially

clearly in the declaration of fellow ADX prisoner Erwin Villatoro, which is attached as Exh. J.



8/33

8

In early 2013 Villatoro was housed with Francisco in the ADX SHU, which at the time was

located in the prisons Kilo Unit. Villatoro Decl. 4 Villatoro worked as the unit orderly for a

time, and thus was let out of his cell for a few hours every day to clean the range and communal

showers. Id.2

When out of his cell, Villatoro was able to see into Franciscos cell, and on one

occasion volunteered to clean the inside of the cell itself, because the smell was overpowering

and permeated the entire range and because he felt sorry for Francisco and anyone else who

would have to move into the cell. Id. 8. The ADX staff issued him rubber boots, gloves and

cleaning supplies for the task. Id. 9 When he entered the cell he first noticed that the sink was

partially filled with liquefied feces. Id. He then noticed a group of small feces sculptures on the

desk, which has protruding pieces of broken pretzel sticks, along with stains on the walls. Id.

The cell was so contaminated that it took Villatoro two hours to clean it, id., even though it is

made of concrete and steel and is about the size of a small bathroom. See Exh. R (a photo of a K

unit cell before a recent renovation in which the tiles were removed from the floor). Despite

this cleaning, within a few days it was back to its prior, fetid condition. Villatoro Decl., Exh. J,

at 11.

Although Francicos feces obsession is the most obvious persistent sign of his mental

illness, he exhibits other signs and symptoms of severe dysfunction. For example, he rarely

speaks with either prisoners or staff members. Mallett Decl., Exh. B, at 6; Trigg Decl., Exh. A,

at 8; Bruce Decl., Exh. C, at 4; Clark Decl., Exh. D, at 7; Barron Decl., Exh. F, at 8; Jones

Decl., Exh. G, at 6; Bacote Decl., Exh. H, at 4; Orr Decl., Exh. I, at 5; Shryock Decl., Exh. K,

2As detailed in the Amended Complaint, Kilo Unit is one of the units at ADX in which the cells

do not contain individual showers, so prisoners can shower a few times in a week in a communalshower. See Compl. 33-34 and associated Compl. Exh. 6.



9/33

9

at 6. Instead, he either ignores efforts to communicate with him, see, e.g., Villatoro Decl., Exh.

J, 9, or responds with unrecognizable hand gestures. See, e.g. Mallett Decl., Exh. B, 10;

Bacote decl. Exh. H, at 4. Even when offered assistance by other prisoners (such as a

magazine), he is nonresponsive. Orr Decl., Exh. I, at 5.

Likewise, Francisco rarely if ever has any property in his cell, often even going without a

mattress, meaning that any sleep he gets is on a bare concrete bench. See Trigg Decl., 6,

Mallett Decl., Exh. B, at 9; Bruce Decl., Exh. C, at 6; Bacote Decl., Exh. H, at 8; Shryock

Decl., Exh. K, at 5. He also refuses to leave his cell for recreation. Barron Decl., Exh. F, at 11.

Several of the prisoners who are familiar with Francisco and signed declarations are

themselves mentally ill, and most of them have been housed with other mentally ill prisoners at

some point. See, e.g., Mallett Decl., Exh. B, at 15; Clark Decl., Exh. D, at 10; Pinson Decl.,

Exh. E, at 9; Barron Decl., Exh. F, at 6; Bacote Decl., Exh. H, at 9. Universally, the declarants

believe that something is seriously wrong with Francisco. See, e.g., Trigg Decl., Exh. A, at 13;

Mallett Decl., Exh. B, at 15; Clark Decl., Exh. D, at 10. ADX prisoner Jeremy Pinson noted:

I have a serious mental illness and have been around the mentally ill most of mylife. I have been around prisoners who are trying to fake mental illness. Over an

extended period of observation, efforts to fake mental illness become obvious,

because the prisoner forgets to maintain the act or tries to negotiate for something.I do not believe Francisco is pretending to be sick. He always behaves the very

same way, whether or not people are watching. No sane person would or couldlive the way he does. And Francisco has been that way since 2011, at least.

Pinson Decl., Exh. E, at at 9; see also Barron Decl., Exh. F, at 7; Jones Decl., Exh. G, at 7;

Bacote Decl., Exh. H, at 9.

Rather than take measures to ensure proper treatment for Francisco, however, ADX staff

appear to have given up on him. They use blankets or sandbags pushed up against the bottom of



10/33

10

his cell to try to contain the overpowering smell of feces. Trigg Decl., Exh. A, at at 5; see also

Barron Decl., Exh. F, at 10 (describing ADX staff members using a plastic sandbag to try to

keep Francisco from pushing feces under his door into the corridor); Bacote Decl., Exh. H, at 5

(same). ADX staff members threaten Francisco concerning his unsanitary cell conditions. See

Mallett Decl., Exh. B, at 5 (relating incident in which two officers were standing in front of

Franciscos cell door stating how they would beat him if he did not clean himself, and that that

they would get the SORT team to come put his head in his toilet bowl; at the time Franciscos

feces were spread on the floor and range); Shryock Decl., Exh. K, at 9 (describing ADX staff

members yelling at Francisco to keep that s--t in [his] cell). Although ADX mental health

providers visit the range where Francisco lives from time to time, they rarely if ever even try to

communicate with him, and when they do make an effort they either just wave at him or say his

name a few times before walking off. Mallett Decl., Exh. B, at 11; Bruce Decl., Exh. C, at 7;

Pinson Decl., Exh. E, at 7; Barron Decl., Exh. F, at 12; Jones Decl., Exh. G, at 9; Bacote

Decl., Exh. H, at 10; Orr Decl., Exh. I, at 9; Shryock Decl., Exh. K, at 9. ADX staff members

even frequently fail or refuse to feed Francisco, or offer him only subsistence sack lunches.

Mallett Decl., 13.

C. Franciscos Symptoms Are Consistent With Serious Mental Illness.

Doris Gundersen, M.D. is a forensic psychiatrist engaged by plaintiffs to evaluate certain

prisoners at ADX as well as certain aspects of the ADX mental health care system. In her 18

months of work on the case, she has become familiar with many of the mentally ill prisoners at

the facility. Gundersen Decl., Exh. L, at 4.



11/33

11

Dr. Gundersen was asked to review evidence concerning current Francisco and, in

particular, the question whether the evidence of his current circumstances gives rise to a serious

concern about his mental health and, relatedly, the care he currently is receiving at ADX. Id. 5

While she generally is highly reluctant to offer opinions about the mental health status or

treatment needs of an individual in the absence of clinically evaluating them, she has opined that

Franciscos circumstances are unique in that she has been informed that he is nonverbal and that

he has not responded to efforts to communicate with him. Id. She therefore believes that any

effort to secure a voluntary interview with him in the ADX visiting room would be futile. Id.

Accordingly, her knowledge of his situation is confined to review of pertinent portions of his

BOP medical and mental health records, correspondence from his mother, and the declarations

and testimony of other prisoners describing his behavior and living conditions. Id.

Based on the information available to her, Dr. Gundersens declaration expresses a

number of concerns about Francisco. First, Francisco is exhibiting behaviors that are consistent

with, and indeed in many respects characteristic of, a major mental illness, namely

schizophrenia. Id. 7. Schizophrenia is an often devastating mental illness that is characterized

by serious disordered thought processes and often by perceptual disturbances including

hallucinations, delusions and severe paranoia. Id. Schizophrenia patients also often exhibit

bizarre behavior. Id.

A second concern expressed by Dr. Gundersen is that is that whether or not Francisco is

gravely mentally ill, his living conditions pose a serious risk of infection and other health

problems. Id. 9. Feces is bacteria laden and is therefore a dangerous disease vector. Id. When

combined with open skin wounds (which Francisco has repeatedly experienced, according to his



12/33

12

BOP medical chart), persistent exposure to feces is especially hazardous. Id. Thus, even if

Francisco is not mentally ill, his living conditions and particularly his hoarding and smearing of

feces place him at dramatically elevated risk of disease. Id.3

The same likely is true of

prisoners who live in proximity to him, especially those who are compelled to move into a cell

that he has occupied. Id.

Dr. Gundersen also notes that the BOP medical records provided to her are cause for

serious concern because, in many instances, data reflected in those records suggest a need for

further laboratory testing or examination that does not appear to have been done. Id. at 10. For

example, one chart entry reflects that Francisco had elevated blood pressure. Id. He also had a

significant amount of weight loss which was not addressed in his medical care. Id. He had

swelling and pain in his lower extremities which is unexplained. Id. Standard medical practice

would have called for further testing, but there is no evidence that such testing was done. Id.

That fact, in turn, causes Dr. Gundersen concern that Franciscos other medical and mental

health needs are not being addressed. Id. Given the evidence of living conditions that suggest a

high risk of exposure to infection, the absence of monitoring and care may place Francisco at

risk of a disease that is neither detected nor treated in a timely fashion and that may life

threatening. Id.

Based on the existing record and the foregoing concerns about that record, Dr. Gundersen

opines that: (1) Francisco is exhibiting signs and symptoms that are consistent with, and indeed

in many respects characteristic of, a major mental illness, namely schizophrenia; (2) the living

3Indeed, as noted below and in 11 of Dr. Gundersens declaration, disease -- in the form of a

severe staph infection -- has in fact occurred in a mentally ill ADX prisoner, Richie Hill, wholike Francisco handled feces, who like Francisco was ignored by the BOP staff, and who verynearly died as a result.



13/33

13

conditions reflected in the information available to her expose Francisco to a risk -- and perhaps

serious risk - of disease, whether or not he is mentally ill; (3) there is a substantial basis to

believe that Franciscos mental and physical health are both in jeopardy, and that a careful

clinical examination by qualified medical and mental health professionals is necessary to

determine what, if any, conditions Francisco suffers from, how to treat any conditions that are

diagnosed, and how to manage Franciscos behavior in a manner that reduces the risk of future

deterioration of his mental and physical health. Id. 13. She also notes that even further delay

in treating Francisco may result in irreversible injury:

As with other forms of illness, serious mental illness often becomes more severe ifnot timely and properly treated. Over time, untreated serious mental illness can

become more resistant to treatment methods, when initiated, and the patients

prognosis can become more dire, and the probability of recovery more remote.

Although I cannot presently determine whether Mr. Franciscos mental illness, ifany, is in fact becoming more severe, or whether his prognosis is in fact

worsening, I am concerned that, given the symptoms reported and the isolation inwhich he lives, every day that passes before his condition is addressed reduces the

likelihood of a satisfactory clinical outcome, and increases the likelihood of

irreversible damage to his body as well as his mind.

Id. 14.

D. The BOPs Most Recent Psychological Evaluation Of Francisco Called For

Continued Monitoring, Which is Not Occurring In Any Meaningful Respect.

The treatment Francisco receives at ADX is utterly contrary to the BOPs own

recommendations for his care. After many requests for the production of Franciscos BOP

Central File, which includes reports from prior psychological evaluations, Plaintiffs counsel

finally obtained the file from the BOP during the last week of August 2013. Franciscos

psychological history is distressing, and demonstrates that he has been mute and unresponsive to

human social stimuli since 2009, well before his September 2011 transfer to ADX. The record



14/33

14

also reflects that his last meaningful evaluation was conducted in April 2011, before his transfer.

Exh. O (BOP psychological evaluations of Jonathan Francisco), at Bates Nos. 00046-00050. At

that time, he was diagnosed with malingering, or fabricating the symptoms of mental disorder.

Id. The April 2011 evaluator stated, however, that the evaluation was limited by the format (it

was done by video interview rather than in person, and Francisco refused to speak, limiting the

evaluators ability to collect information). Id. Previous evaluators noted that Franciscos

behavior was consistent with the signs and symptoms of several mental disorders, including

catatonia and schizophrenia, and that Francisco should continue to be monitored and evaluated.

Id. at Bates Nos. 00059-00067; 00095-96.

Despite that recommendation, the last meaningful evaluation of Francisco was completed

more than two years ago, and his files from evaluations completed at ADX do not contain

records of any formal evaluation since his transfer in September 2011. Rather, they include only

perfunctory notations made by psychologists who have passing interactions with him, or merely

observe him through his cell door.

The BOPs failure to properly and professionally evaluate Francisco disregard its own

prior medical recommendations. In addition, this treatment violates the BOPs own written

policies, which require that mentally ill prisoners be monitored on an ongoing basis to assess

treatment compliance. Exh. P (BOP Program Statement 5310.13, Institution Management of

Mentally Ill Prisoners), at 5. For certain prisoners, including those receiving psychotropic

medication and those segregated for mental health reasons, mental health staff must, at a

minimum, conduct a monthly interview to assess the prisoners treatment strategy. Id. The



15/33

15

record demonstrates that the BOP has abdicated this responsibility in the case, at least, of

Jonathan Francisco.

E. Two Recent Mental Illness Catastrophes Demonstrate That The BOP Is

Either Unwilling Or Unable To Protect And Treat Mentally Ill Prisoners At

ADX.

The persistent pattern of deliberate indifference to the severe mental health needs of

ADX prisoners is borne out in the recent ordeals of ADX prisoners Richie Hill and Robert Knott.

In October and November 2012 -- about six months after this lawsuit was filed -- Hill nearly died

because of the BOPs neglect of his severe Schizoaffective Disorder, which resulted in acute

psychosis, severe malnutrition, and systemic staph infections that, according to the BOPs own

medical records, very nearly killed him before his emergency medical evacuation to a BOP

medical facility. Under proper care, he has since been restored to relative good health and

mental stability. Knott was not so lucky. He had schizophrenia. As a result of the BOPs

neglect he stopped taking his medication, decompensated and hung himself at the ADX on

September 7, 2013. These two grisly episodes demonstrate that the mental health staff at ADX

cannot be trusted to protect Francisco, assess when his situation becomes dire, or provide needed

medical and mental health care on a timely basis.

1. Richie Hill

Richie Hill was held at ADX in isolation for many years, including an unbroken period

of over six years before he was evacuated on an emergency basis from ADX to the United States

Medical Center for Federal Prisoners in Springfield, Missouri on November 28, 2012, where he

remains today. Hill Dep., Vol. 1, Exh. M hereto, at 9:15-20. Like Francisco, Hill exhibited

obvious symptoms of severe mental illness that were ignored by ADX staff. He consumed



16/33

16

rocks, styrofoam, radio parts, and was frequently observed eating balls of his own feces. Id. at

16:12-14; 17:25-18:1; 95:22-24; 19:2-25. He attempted suicide approximately ten times while at

ADX, including once by placing pencil lead, rocks and pencil particles up his penis. Id. at

119:25-120:20. He mutilated his forehead and face by carving pitchforks and cannibal marks

into it, and also cut his lips open with staples and put flies into the wounds. Id. at 33:16-36:2;

34:10-35:1. He also attempted to gouge out his own left eyeball about six times, often by

pushing rocks into it. Id. at 29:3-7 and 75:17-76:16.

While at the ADX, Mr. Hill repeatedly begged the staff for help with his mental issues,

and repeatedly asked to be transferred to a mental hospital. Id. at 113:3-117:14, 130:21-137:18,

143:7-145:17 and 146:24-149:18. In response, in one instance the head psychologist at the ADX

bribed him to withdraw his transfer request by giving him a radio, which Hill later smashed and

ate. Id. at 132:11-133:9. In other instances, the BOP responded to his pleas with bureaucratic

gobbledygook about his supposed failure to attempt informal resolution of his issues, his

violation of a technicality requiring prisoners to confine their administrative remedy forms to a

single issue, and his supposedly untimely submission of his requests See, e.g., id. at 146:24-

149:18. The record will show that his allegedly inadequate paperwork practices generally

coincided with periods during which he was acutely psychotic and sitting in his feces-smeared

cell without a pencil, complaint form or any other means to communicate in writing that the BOP

was slowly killing him.

As with Francisco, Hills illness was obvious. Any BOP observer could have seen, and

in fact BOP psychology staffdidsee, Hill smearing feces on the wall and on himself, as well as

eating his feces. Id. at 136:24-137:18. Likewise, the BOP staff would have been easily able to



17/33

17

see blood smeared on Mr. Hills walls and body. Id. at 142:22-1436 (7/31/2013). And yet the

BOP did nothing until he was very nearly dead.

In 2012, Hills legs became infected after he was overcome with a persistent delusion that

diamond rings were embedded inside his legs. Id. at 17:3-18:8. In an effort to remove the rings,

he began digging holes in them with his fingers. Id. The wounds became severely infected and

fetid; at one point, a worm emerged from one of Mr. Hills wounds. Id. at 25:7-10. Although

Hill repeatedly asked for medical assistance for his legs, little was done. One member of the

medical staff who was aware of his swollen legs told Hill that the swelling would eventually

subside. Hill Dep., Vol. 1, Exh. M hereto, at 20:12-21:22. Other staff members stopped by his

cell and remarked about his swollen legs, but did nothing. Id. at 123:4-20. After his emergency

evacuation to MCFP Springfield, a BOP physician observed that Mr. Hill suffered from severe

multiple systemic infections, appeared to be chronically and acutely septic, and had multiple

draining deep sores. See Exh. S (BOP record of medical examination upon his admission to

MCFP Springfield). The physician informed Mr. Hill that his legs may require amputation, and,

in fact, that the infection was so severe that his life was in danger. Hill Dep., Vol. 1, Exh. M

hereto, at 23:5-14. He ultimately was diagnosed with a severe staph infection. Id. at 23:22-24.

While at ADX, Hill also developed severe malnutrition, according to the BOPs own

medical records. See Exh. S. He testified that as a result of the ADX staffs refusal to feed him,

he lost 50 pounds and experienced starvation so severe that he resorted to eating rocks. Hill

Dep., Vol. 1, Exh. M hereto, at 16:6-14.

During his time at ADX, Hill had some contact with Francisco. Hill testified that

Francisco kept feces in his hair, ate his own feces, and practically never spoke. Hill Dep., Vol. 2,



18/33

18

Exh. N hereto, at 95:24-96:10. Hill also noted that he has both been around individuals with

mental illness and those who had been faking, and firmly feels that Francisco has a genuine

mental illness, warning that the BOP is doing the same thing to [Francisco] that it did to him.

Hill Dep., Vol. 1, Exh. M hereto, at 27:14-15; Hill Dep., Vol. 2, Exh. N hereto, at 96:17-97:7.

2. Robert Knott.

Robert Knott hung himself at ADX on September 7, 2013. Exh. T (BOP statement

concerning Knott Suicide). At the time of his death he was 48 years old. Id. Mr. Knott is the

seventh person, at least, to take his own life at the ADX. Compl. 93-94. Like most of the

other suicide victims, Mr. Knott had been diagnosed and treated by the BOP for severe mental

illness, and therefore should never have been at ADX in the first place.

Specifically, public records make clear that at the time of his 1988 conviction for

kidnapping, and subsequent life sentence, Mr. Knott had been diagnosed with schizophrenia.

See United States v. Knott, 894 F.2d 1119, 1121 (9th Cir. 1990) (The parties agree that

[Knotts] schizophrenia is a serious mental disease that satisfies the first prong of [the statutory

test for the insanity defense]). Schizophrenia is a major mental illness that is characterized by

serious thought disruptions and often by hallucinations, delusions and severe paranoia.

Gundersen Decl., Exh. L, at 7. Schizophrenia patients also often exhibit bizarre behavior. Id.

It is clear that the Department of Justice did not dispute Mr. Knotts schizophrenia

diagnosis in 1988, and the limited records now available to Plaintiffs suggest that at no time

since Mr. Knott entered BOP custody in 1988 has anyone seriously denied the nature or severity

of his mental illness. See Exh. U (4/19/02 psychological report of Robert Knott, Exh. B to

Petition to Determine Present Mental Condition of an Imprisoned Prisoner), at 1 (Throughout



19/33

19

his incarceration in the Federal Bureau of Prisons, Mr. Knott has been diagnosed with

schizophrenia and antisocial personality disorder). Nevertheless, in April 1995 the BOP

transferred him to the ADX. See Exh. T. Thereafter, excepting only the periods of time when he

was hospitalized for mental illness at Springfield MCFP, it appears that Mr. Knott remained at

the ADX for the entirety of the 18 1/2 years between his first arrival there in April 1995 and his

death in September 2013. See Exh. U (4/19/02 Psychological Report, summarizing Knott

medical history).

Most of what Plaintiffs now know about Knotts symptoms and treatment comes from

two mental health evaluations filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri

in 2002, in connection with a petition by the Department of Justice to have him civilly

committed so he could be involuntarily medicated. In the evaluation submitted with the

governments petition, a BOP doctor noted:

Id., at 1.

Later, after discussing Knotts background, including his six prior hospitalizations at

Springfield, his history of bizarre, psychotic behavior (particularly his obsessive refusal to wear

clothing), and his up and down cycles of psychological functioning as he moved back and forth

between prisons and BOP medical facilities, the BOP psychologist concluded in the following

terms that Mr. Knott suffered from a severe psychotic disorder that at that time preclude[ed]

his ability to function adequately in a regular Bureau of Prisons facility:



20/33

20

Id., at 4.

After the Department of Justice sought to civilly commit him, Knott was appointed

counsel, who secured a second opinion from another psychologist. That opinion, which is

attached hereto as Exhibit V, noted that Knott had refused to participate in an evaluation, making

it impossible for the psychologist to render an independent diagnostic opinion. But the report

also describes in detail the then-existing BOP records relating to Knott, which include references

to a pre-incarceration mental health hospitalization for symptoms of severe depression and

command hallucinations, and recount a series of bizarre or otherwise worrisome incidents

involving Mr. Knott while in BOP custody:

In 1992, staff members at Marion USP found him hanging from his cell bars in an effortto protect his body from white bugs;

In 1995 he was transferred from Marion to Springfield following a suicidal gesture;

In August 1996 he was sent from ADX to Springfield after cutting himself;

In 1998 he was again transferred from ADX to Springfield because he wasuncommunicative and refusing medication. A later report by Springfield staff is

summarized as saying that upon his arrival at Springfield, he was withdrawn, evasive,



21/33

21

and impulsive. In the following months, he refused to maintain proper nutrition, waslabile, frequently covered the window in his cell, and engaged in yelling and screaming.

In 1999 he was again transferred from ADX to Springfield after commandhallucinations to kill himself.

Id. at 3-4.

Even after the 2002 Springfield admission during which Mr. Knott was civilly committed

and involuntarily medicated (his seventh trip to Springfield for mental problems), the BOP again

violated its own policies by sending him back to the ADX. Plaintiffs presently have little

information about his condition from that point until early September 2013. But Plaintiffs

recent interviews of prisoners who lived near Knott during the last week or so of his life confirm

that shortly before his suicide Knott again went off his medications, again decompensated, again

started yelling and screaming, again became incoherent, wrote Heaven on the wall of his cell,

and finally, during the evening of Saturday, September 7, hanged himself from a sheet attached

to his cell bars. See, e.g., Currence Decl., Exh. W, at 4-5 and 8-12.

In short, Knott was severely mentally ill, never belonged at ADX, and died when and as

he did because of the BOPs patent, inexcusable disregard of his serious medical needs. His

illness was obvious to anyone who looked. That he was sent back to the ADX over and over and

spent years there is in and of itself a violation of BOP policy. And that he died as he did, with

the signs and symptoms of psychosis everywhere, can mean only one of two things: either (1) the

BOP simply doesnt care that it has an Eighth Amendment duty to care for ADX prisoners with

mental illness; or (2) the BOP is incapable at a fundamental level of diagnosing and treating

mental illness in men assigned to ADX. In either case, Knotts life and death reveal in searing

detail the fundamental constitutional problems that this lawsuit aims to correct. That would have



22/33

22

been true whenever Knott died. That he died three weeks ago, when the BOP knew we and the

Court were watching, puts an exclamation point on the urgency of the persistent problems at

ADX, on the reality that the half-measures instituted by the BOP since the lawsuit was filed are

not nearly enough, and on the acute danger in which Jonathan Francisco lives.

III. ARGUMENT

A. A Preliminary Injunction Must Be Issued Requiring Mr. Francisco To Be

Transferred To An Appropriate Medical Facility For A Renewed MentalHealth Evaluation To Avoid Further Medical And Mental Health Injury

Akin To That Suffered By Mr. Hill.

A movant is entitled to a preliminary injunction if he can establish the following: (1) a

substantial likelihood of success on the merits of the case; (2) irreparable injury to the movant if

the preliminary injunction is denied; (3) the threatened injury to the movant outweighs the injury

to the other party under the preliminary injunction; and (4) the injunction is not adverse to the

public interest. Kikumura v. Hurley, 242 F.3d 950, 955 (10th Cir. 2001); see also Schrier v.

Univ. Of Co., 427 F.3d 1253, 1258 (10th Cir. 2005); F.R.Civ.P. 65. Accordingly, we address

each requirement for the granting of a preliminary injunction in turn.

1. Francisco Is Likely To Succeed On The Merits.

The Eighth Amendment prohibits the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment and

embodies broad and idealistic concepts of dignity, civilized standards, humanity, and decency.

Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 102 (1976) (internal quotations and citations omitted). Under

the Eight Amendment the government has a constitutional obligation to provide medical care

for those whom it is punishing by incarceration. Estelle, 429 U.S. at 103. That duty requires tht

prisoners be provided with a level of medical care which is reasonably designed to meet [their]

routine and emergency health care needs. Ramos v. Lamm, 639 F.2d 559, 574 (10th Cir.1980)



23/33

23

(quotation omitted). A violation of the Eighth Amendments prohibition on cruel and unusual

punishments occurs when there is deliberate indifference to the serious medical needs of a

prisoner. Estelle, 429 U.S. at 104. Deliberate indifference involves both an objective and a

subjective component. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834, 843-44 (1994).

The objective component is met if the medical need is sufficiently serious. Id. at 834.

The subjective component is met if a prison official knows of and disregards an excessive risk

to inmate health or safety. Id. at 837. Francisco can prevail on each of these components.

a. Francisco Is Likely To Prevail On The Objective Component

Of Deliberate Indifference.

[A] medical need is sufficiently serious if it is one that has been diagnosed by a

physician as mandating treatment or one that is so obvious that even a lay person would easily

recognize the necessity for a doctors attention. Mata v. Saiz, 427 F.3d 745, 751 (10th Cir.

2005) (quotation omitted). Mental illness can be as serious as any other illness, and denying

prisoners access to mental health diagnosis and treatment endanger[s] their health and well

being, make[s] unnecessary suffering inevitable, and evince[s] on the part of the State a

deliberate indifference to the serious health needs of the prison population. Id. at 5774; see also,

e.g., Boyd v. Knox, 47 F.3d 966, 969 (8th Cir. 1995) (A three-week delay in dental care, coupled

with knowledge of the inmate-patients suffering, can support a finding of an Eighth Amendment

violation under section 1983.).

4See also Riddle v. Mondragon, 83 F.3d 1197, 1203 (10th Cir. 1996) (The state has a

constitutional obligation to provide medical care for those whom it is punishing by incarceration. . . including medical treatment for psychological or psychiatric care.); Battle v. Anderson, 564F.2d 388, 403 (10th Cir. 1977) (a prisoner is entitled to be confined in an environment whichdoes not result in his degeneration or which threatens his mental and physical well being);Bowring v. Godwin, 551 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1977) (We see no underlying distinction betweenthe right to medical care for physical ills and its psychological or psychiatric counterpart.).



24/33

24

The objective component of this standard is met here by the evidence contained in the

attached declarations of prisoners who live with him, day in and day out. These prisoners see his

dysfunction every day, and know something is seriously wrong. See Mallett Decl., Exh. B, at

15 (something is seriously wrong with him); Clark Decl., Exh. D, at 10 (I believe Francisco

is seriously mentally ill. No normal person could live like he does.); Barron Decl., Exh. F, at

7 (In my opinion, Francisco is seriously mentally ill, because of the things I have seen and

heard. I do not believe any person would choose to live the way he does.); Shryock Decl., Exh.

K, at 8 (It is obvious to every prisoner on our range that something is seriously wrong with

Francisco.).

Dr. Gundersens declaration also helps meet the objective prong. Based on her review of

the evidence concerning Francisco, she believes that: Francisco is exhibiting signs and symptoms

that are consistent with, and indeed in many respects characteristic of, a major mental illness,

namely schizophrenia; that the living conditions at ADX, as reflected in the information

available to Dr. Gundersen, expose Francisco to a risk -- and perhaps serious risk -- of disease,

whether or not he is mentally ill; that there is a substantial basis to believe that Mr. Franciscos

mental and physical health are both in jeopardy; and that a careful clinical examination by

qualified medical and mental health professionals is necessary to determine what, if any,

conditions Mr. Francisco suffers from, how to treat any conditions that are diagnosed, and how

to manage Mr. Franciscos behavior in a manner that reduces the risk of future deterioration of

his mental and physical health. Gundersen Decl., Exh. L, at 13. She also believes that unless

addressed, Franciscos condition may become resistant to treatment, and result in irreversible

physical and mental injury. Id. at 14.



25/33

25

b. Francisco Is Likely To Prevail On The Subjective ComponentOf Deliberate Indifference.

The subjective component of deliberate indifference is met if a prison official knows of

and disregards an excessive risk to inmate health or safety. Farmer, 511 U.S. at 837; see also

Mata, 427 F.3d at 752 (The deliberate indifference standard lies somewhere between the poles

of negligence at one end and purpose or knowledge at the other). Determining whether a prison

official had requisite knowledge of the risk to prisoner health or safety is a question of fact

subject to demonstration in the usual ways, including inference from circumstantial evidence . . .,

and a fact-finder may conclude that a prison official knew of a substantial risk from the very fact

that the risk was obvious. Farmer, 511 U.S. at 842 (emphasis added). This is so because if a

risk is obvious so that a reasonable man would realize it, we might well infer that [the defendant]

did in fact realize it. Mata, 427 F.3d at 752 (internal quotes omitted). Moreover, a fact-finder

may conclude that a prison official knew of a substantial risk from the very fact that the risk was

obvious. Farmer, 511 U.S. at 842 (emphasis added).

As the above facts set forth, Francisco is being knowingly mistreated and ignored by the

BOP and ADX staff and is in severe danger of irreparable harm and injury. These risks stem

from both the obvious mental health emergency that Francisco is experiencing as well as the

grave risk of other health-related issues that stem from the unsanitary prison conditions that are

beyond Franciscos control. Common sense confirms that Franciscos plight is obvious to

anyone who chooses to look. The smell of his feces permeates the entire unit he lives in.

Corrections Officers have commented to prisoners that smells nasty and I dont know how

you guys put up with that, Villatoro Decl., Exh. J, at 13 (as if prisoners have any other choice),

but their assistance is limited to trying to confine the smell with sandbags placed at the bottom of



26/33

26

Franciscos door. Barron Decl., Exh. F, at 10. When one prisoner specifically directed an ADX

psychologists attention to Franciscos plight, she walked away. Villatoro Decl., Exh. J, at 12

It is notable that at the time of this discussion, the psychologist was herself covering her nose

because of the stench emanating from Franciscos cell. Id.

By allowing Francisco to live in squalor, every day the BOP puts Francisco in danger of

experiencing the same type of serious medical harm that Mr. Hill described in his deposition

statements. Accordingly, an immediate preliminary injunction granting Francisco a mental

health evaluation or transfer to an appropriate mental health facility is necessary.

2. Francisco Will Suffer Irreparable Injury If The Preliminary

Injunction Is Denied.

A plaintiff suffers irreparable injury when the court would be unable to grant an

effective monetary remedy after a full trial because such damages would be inadequate or

difficult to ascertain. Kikumura, 242 F.3d at 963. When an alleged constitutional right is

involved, most courts hold that no further showing of irreparable injury is necessary. Id(citing

11A Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R. Miller & Mary Kay Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure

2948.1 (2d ed.1995)). Here, there is a fundamental constitutional right involved.

While the violation of a constitutional right alone is sufficient to demonstrate harm to

Francisco, a preliminary injunction must also be granted because of the imminent risk of serious

injury or death he faces if the status quo remains. The injury to Franciscos mental health is

ongoing, and the longer his medical condition is allowed to remain untreated, the greater the

likelihood of irreversible injury, and the graver his prognosis becomes. Gundersen Decl., Exh.

L, at 14. This Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that such threats to the health of an

inmate constitute irreparable injury, as here, where the injury is both certain and great, not



27/33

27

merely serious or substantial; of the sort that cannot be adequately atoned for in money; or one

that the district court cannot remedy following a final determination on the merits. Edmisten v.

Werholtz, 287 F. App'x 728, 733-34 (10th Cir. 2008) (citing Prairie Band of Potawatomi Indians

v. Pierce, 253 F.3d 1234, 1250 (10th Cir.2001)) (internal quotation marks omitted). Because of

the substantial evidence that Francisco suffers from obvious and severe mental illness, and

because of the physical health risks his unsanitary and antisocial behavior pose, as demonstrated

by the outcome of similarly-afflicted inmates like Hill and Knott, there is significant risk that

Francisco will suffer irreparable harm -- and perhaps die -- if the Court allows him to remain in

his current condition at ADX.

3. The Threatened Injury To The Movant Outweighs The Injury To The

Government Under The Preliminary Injunction.

The threatened injury to Francisco -- irreversible injury or death -- is much greater than

the injury, if any, to the government if the preliminary injunction were to be granted. Here,

Francisco is exhibiting grave mental health symptoms that have gone untreated for years. The

burden to the government, however, is negligible; it constitutes only the cost of transporting

Francisco and providing him with necessary medical and mental health services, consistent with

its preexisting obligations under the law. Indeed, removing him from ADX quite likely would

reduce the burden now borne by other prisoners who are forced to ensure the stench from his

cell, and the staff members who work near and with Francisco. As the Tenth Circuit has held,

the burden of providing healthcare services to prisoners is not misplaced or undue if in fact one

or more of the defendants is legally obligated to provide the treatment. Edmisten v. Werholtz,

287 F. Appx 728, 734 (10th Cir. 2008) (unpublished). The BOP and its institutions, including

ADX, are obligated to provide inmates with necessary healthcare, because inmates are not at



28/33

28

liberty to seek it on their own. Providing Francisco with the treatment he requires is, therefore,

not a burden, but rather a routine requirement of its operations. In sum, because the BOP

routinely transfers prisoners requiring medical and/or mental health care from ADX to private

hospitals or other BOP facilities, there is little if any burden associated with granting the present

motion.

4. The Injunction Would Not Be Adverse To The Public Interest.

[T]he public interest is promoted by the robust enforcement of constitutional rights,

Am. Freedom Def. Initiative v. Suburban Mobility for Reg. Transp., 698 F.3d 885, 896 (6th Cir.

2012), especially those of societys most vulnerable individuals. See also Edmisten, 287 F.

App'x at 735 (the public has an interest in protecting the civil rights of all persons under the

Constitution; holding that defendant prison facility had a constitutional obligation to provide

dental care under the Eighth Amendment, and compelling defendants to perform that duty is not

contrary to the public interest. Protecting Franciscos constitutional rights is in the public

interest; indeed, protecting constitutional rights is at the core of the publics interest.

5. Plaintiff Has Met Its Burden To Obtain A Preliminary Injunction.

Plaintiff recognizes that its request for a preliminary injunction in this case may fall into

one or more of the disfavored categories; (1) the injunction will disturb the status quo, (2) the

injunction is mandatory and not prohibitory, and (3) the injunction gives the movant substantially

all of the relief it is entitled to after a trial on the merits. SCFC ILC Inc. v. VISA USA, Inc., 936

F.2d 1096, 1098-9 (10th

Cir. 1991). Plaintiff also recognizes in these situations that its burden is

heightened with respect to four factors necessary to obtain a preliminary injunction and the Court

must, more closely scrutinize the request to assure that the exigencies of the case support the



29/33

29

granting of a particularly extraordinary remedy. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Unlao Do

Vegetal v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 973, 983 (10th

Cir. 2004). The exigencies of this case are self-

evident as the safety and even the life of Francisco may hang in the balance. Plaintiff has surely

met its heightened burden to obtain the relief requested in this matter.

B. Exhaustion

The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) requires that prisoners exhaust available

administrative remedies. 42 U.S.C. 1997e(a) (No action shall be brought . . . until such

administrative remedies as are available are exhausted. (emphasis added)). But as the Tenth

Circuit has explained, [i]t follows that if an administrative remedy is not available, then an

inmate cannot be required to exhaust it. Because the statute does not explicitly define the term

available, we must adopt its ordinary meaning. Tuckel v. Grover, 660 F.3d 1249, 1252 (10th

Cir. 2011) (citing Gross v. FBL Fin. Servs., Inc., 557 U.S. 167 (2009)). Moreover, [t]o be

available, a remedy must be capable of use for the accomplishment of a purpose. Id. (citing

Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 737 (2001)).

The Movant here is the CLA. No BOP administrative remedy program is available to the

CLA for use in advocating its constituents interests. Accordingly, there is no remedy here to

exhaust.

In addition, as detailed in the Rule 7.1 certification set forth below, counsel for the CLA

has repeatedly called the BOPs attention to Franciscos plight over a period of months. Most

recently, on or about September 3, 2013, plaintiffs counsel spoke with defendants counsel and

specifically asked that in light of Richie Hills devastating deposition testimony, Francisco be

moved to a medical facility immediately. Although defendants counsel agreed to confer with



30/33

30

the BOP concerning this request, as of this filing, Francisco remains at the ADX. In the

meantime, Robert Knott has killed himself. These circumstances and the others outlined above

make clear that even if some remedy is available to the CLA in theory, in practice any request

for relief would be futile, and waiting for the BOP to respond may further endanger Franciscos

health, if not life.

IV. RULE 7.1 CERTIFICATION

In recent months undersigned counsel for Plaintiffs has repeatedly called Franciscos

plight to the BOPs attention. On or about September 3, 2013, plaintiffs counsel spoke with

defendants counsel and specifically asked that Francisco be moved to a medical facility

immediately. Although defendants counsel agreed to confer with the BOP concerning this

request, as of this filing Francisco remains at the ADX, and defendants counsel has not

responded to the request.

V. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff the CLA respectfully asks the Court to grant its

emergency motion for a preliminary injunction and require that the BOP transfer Jonathan

Francisco to a suitable medical facility for a clinical examination by qualified medical and

mental health professionals to determine what, if any, conditions Francisco suffers from, how to

treat any conditions that are diagnosed, and how to manage Franciscos behavior in a manner

that reduces the risk of future deterioration of his mental and physical health.



31/33

31

Dated: September 30, 2013 Respectfully submitted,

ARNOLD & PORTER LLP

By /s/ Edwin P. Aro

Edwin P. Aro

370 Seventeenth Street

Suite 4400Denver, CO 80202-1370

Telephone: +1 [email protected]

Maurice A. Leiter

777 S. Figueroa Street

44th

Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90017

Telephone: +1 213.243.4000

[email protected]

Robert P. Taylor

Three Embarcadero Center

7th FloorSan Francisco, CA 94111

Telephone: +1 415.471.3100

[email protected]

C. Scott Morrow555 Twelfth Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20004




32/33

32

Veronica E. RendonKeri L. Arnold399 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10022


[email protected]

Nancy L. Perkins

555 Twelfth Street, NW



WASHINGTON LAWYERS COMMITTEE

FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND URBAN AFFAIRS

Deborah Golden

11 Dupont Circle, NW

Suite 400



Attorneys for Plaintiffs



33/33

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that on this 30th day of September, 2013, the foregoing

EMERGENCY MOTION BY PLAINTIFF, CENTER FOR LEGAL ADVOCACY, FOR A

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDERING DEFENDANT TO TRANSFER ADX

PRISONER, JONATHAN FRANCISCO, FOR A MEDICAL EVALUATION AND

TREATMENT was filed with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send

notification of such filing to all counsel of record as follows:

Amy L. PaddenU.S. Attorneys Office - Denver

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 700

Denver, CO [email protected]

Marcy E. Cook

U.S. Attorneys Office - Denver

1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 700

Denver, CO 80202

[email protected]

/s/ Linda J. Teater


francisco supermax emergency motion

Documents