Seth Vilchuck v. Trent Allen Warden PCF, Centurion Health - Deliberate Indifference

Jump To

Top Caption Trial Court Document The text of this document was obtained by analyzing a scanned document and may have typos.

Support FLP

CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.

Please become a member today.

Join Free.law Now

April 20, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note

Seth Vilchuck v. Trent Allen Warden PCF, Maves Mrs., ARS MAT Program, Centurion Health, Lisa Hamblen AHSA, Centurion Health of PCF, Kelly McCafferty MAT program/MHS Centurion Health PCF, John Nwannunu Dr., Centurion Health PCF, Abby Mrs., RN, MAT Program PCF, Miller Mrs., Centurion Health PCF

District Court, S.D. Indiana

• Citations: None known
• Docket Number: 1:25-cv-02333

• Precedential Status: Unknown Status

• Opinion

• Authorities (4)

• Cited By (0)

• Summaries (0)

• Similar Cases (3.4K)

• PDF

Trial Court Document

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

SETH VILCHUCK, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) No. 1:25-cv-02333-JPH-KMB
)
TRENT ALLEN Warden PCF, )
MAVES Mrs., ARS MAT Program, )
Centurion Health, )
LISA HAMBLEN AHSA, Centurion Health )
of PCF, )
KELLY MCCAFFERTY MAT )
program/MHS Centurion Health PCF, )
JOHN NWANNUNU Dr., Centurion Health )
PCF, )
ABBY Mrs., RN, MAT Program PCF, )
MILLER Mrs., Centurion Health PCF, )
)
Defendants. )

ORDER SCREENING COMPLAINT AND DIRECTING
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS

Plaintiff Seth Vilchuck is a prisoner currently incarcerated at Pendleton
Correctional Facility ("Pendleton"). He filed this civil action alleging Defendants
have been deliberately indifferent to a serious medical need and have retaliated
against him. Because the plaintiff is a "prisoner," this Court must screen the
complaint before service on the defendants. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), (c).
I. Screening Standard
When screening a complaint, the Court must dismiss any portion that is
frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks monetary relief
against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). To
determine whether the complaint states a claim, the Court applies the same
standard as when addressing a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(b)(6). See Schillinger v. Kiley, 954 F.3d 990, 993 (7th Cir. 2020).
Under that standard, a complaint must include "enough facts to state a claim to

relief that is plausible on its face." Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content
that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable
for the misconduct alleged." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). The
Court construes pro se complaints liberally and holds them to a "less stringent
standard than pleadings drafted by lawyers." Cesal v. Moats, 851 F.3d 714, 720 (7th Cir. 2017).
II. The Complaint

The Court accepts Mr. Vilchuck's factual allegations as true at the pleading
stage but not his legal conclusions. See Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 ("we must take all
of the factual allegations in the complaint as true," but "we 'are not bound to
accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation'") (quoting
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555)). The complaint names as defendants (1) Pendleton
Warden Trent Allen; (2) Addiction Recovery Services ("ARS") staff member Mrs.
Maves; (3) AHSA Lisa Hamblen; (4) MHS Kelly McCafferty; (5) Dr. John
Nwannunu; (6) Mrs. Miller; (7) RN Mrs. Abby.

Mr. Vilchuck suffers from an opioid addiction. In 2021, while not
incarcerated, Mr. Vilchuck was prescribed suboxone to help treat his addiction.
In April 2024, at Pendleton, Nurse Practitioner Lindsey Manning prescribed
Naltrexone and/or Vivitrol for Mr. Vilchuck, which is an alternative medication
from suboxone for treating opioid addiction.1 Mr. Vilchuck experienced negative
side effects from these medications, including difficulty breathing, heart
palpitations, and pain in his kidneys and sides.

Mrs. Maves is a staff member for the Pendleton Medication Assisted
Treatment ("MAT") program. Mr. Vilchuck asked her for assistance to continue
participating in the MAT program and trying suboxone instead of Naltrexone
and/or Vivitrol, but she never responded to his requests. Mr. Vilchuck also
alleges Warden Allen has ignored his grievances and appeals about not being
allowed to continue participating in the MAT program. Mr. Vilchuck's claim
regarding Dr. Nwannunu is that Mr. Vilchuck "had nurses Jennifer and Ms.
Collins write a report about the allergic reactions and had the medication

discontinued during April 2024 plaintiff continued to seek a alternative
medication still to date November 4th, 2025, Defendant has no care of plaintiff's
urgent need for opioid treatment . . . ." Dkt. 1 at 8. AHSA Lisa Hamblen also has
not assisted in obtaining alternative treatment for Mr. Vilchuck's opioid
addiction, despite his sending letters and requests for healthcare to her. Mr.
Vilchuck claims Mrs. Miller is a Centurion employee who has not responded to
his requests for healthcare related to the MAT program. MHS McCafferty also
has not assisted Mr. Vilchuck in participating in the MAT program with use of

1 Mr. Vilchuck is pursuing a separate lawsuit against NP Manning. Vilchuck v. Manning,
No. 1:25-cv-00021-MPB-MKK. NP Manning has filed a motion for summary judgment
in that case. The Court considered whether it would be appropriate to consolidate this
case with NP Manning's case, given the significant overlap between the claims in that
case and this case. However, because these cases are in much different procedural
postures, it would not be in the interests of judicial economy to now order consolidation.
an alternative medication despite asking for her help in person. Finally, Nurse
Mrs. Abby at some point "forced" Mr. Vilchuck to try Naltrexone again despite
his known previous bad reaction to that medication.

Mr. Vilchuck asserts that he has been suffering physical and mental harm
because of failing to receive adequate treatment for his opioid addiction and that
he fears overdosing and dying if not adequately treated. In addition, Mr. Vilchuck
believes all the defendants have in part been retaliating against him, based on a
physical altercation he had with prison guards in December 2023 and in
response to his filing of grievances and civil lawsuits, including the one against
NP Manning. He also believes the retaliation became worse once it became known
that the possibility of him being transferred to a different facility was being

discussed as part of global settlement negotiations in several of his pending
lawsuits.2 Mr. Vilchuck is seeking damages, plus injunctive relief that would
require him to receive "suboxone 8 mg once a day as I reside in the DOC." Id. at
14.
III. Discussion of Claims
Applying the screening standard to the factual allegations in the
complaint, claims against all Defendants shall proceed under the Eighth

2 After this complaint was filed, a global settlement conference held by Magistrate Judge
Baker was unsuccessful, and Mr. Vilchuck remains at Pendleton. See, e.g., Vilchuck v.
Ballenger et al., No. 1:24-cv-00141-TWP-MJD, dkt. 110.
Amendment for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need and under the
First Amendment for retaliation.3
This summary of claims includes all of the viable claims identified by the

Court. All other claims have been dismissed. If the plaintiff believes that
additional claims were alleged in the complaint, but not identified by the Court,
he shall have through May 11, 2026, in which to file a motion to reconsider the
screening order.
IV. Conclusion and Service of Process
The clerk is directed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to issue process
to defendants Trent Allen, Mrs. Maves, Lisa Hamblen, Kelly McCafferty, Dr. John
Nwannunu, Nurse Abby, and Mrs. Miller in the manner specified by Rule 4(d).

Process shall consist of the complaint filed on November 10, 2025, dkt. [1],
applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of
Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons), and this Order.
Defendants Maves, Hamblen, McCafferty, Dr. Nwannunu, Nurse Abby,
and Mrs. Miller are identified as employees of Centurion Health of Indiana. A
copy of this Order and the process documents shall also be served on Centurion
electronically. Centurion is ORDERED to provide the full name and last known
home address of any defendant who does not waive service if they have such

information. This information shall be filed ex parte.

3 To be clear, Mr. Vilchuck's retaliation claims can only be based on alleged retaliation
for his grievances and lawsuits. His December 2023 physical altercation with guards
cannot be the basis of a retaliation claim, because that altercation would not constitute
protected First Amendment activity.
The clerk is directed to serve the Indiana Department of Correction and
Centurion employees electronically.
Nothing in this Order prohibits the filing of a proper motion pursuant to
Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
SO ORDERED.
Date: 4/20/2026 Pat tanbor—
James Patrick Hanlon
United States District Judge
Southern District of Indiana
Distribution:
Electronic service to Indiana Department of Correction:
Warden Trent Allen
(At Pendleton Correctional Facility)
Electronic service to Centurion
Mrs. Maves
Lisa Hamblen
Kelly McCafferty
Dr. John Nwannunu
Nurse Abby
Mrs. Miller
SETH VILCHUCK
149912
PENDLETON - CF
PENDLETON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
Electronic Service Participant — Court Only