Is this the correct evaluation of the evidence for deliberate indifference and would the Monell policy standard be eroded by the evaluation of this case?

No question identified. : QUESTIONS Question History: The petitioner was housed by the United States Marshal Service pending trial, by the New York County Jail facilities of Monroe and Livingston Counties. In the care of these county jails, the petitioner suffered 13 different tooth abscesses on the same tooth, while requesting that these county jails contact the USMS for care of this issue from 2012 to 2014 and recorded in the medical records. The county jails conceded that it could not provide the care the petitioner needed at the facility, yet failed to arrange the care needed with the USMS. After the second court hearing in 2014, the court addressed the petitioner's tooth problem, the jail gave the USMS false information pertaining to care, then the court ordered that Livingston provide a dental care report for the petitioner's dental care. The jail facility would not provide care after this order, and the petitioner sought legal treatise from the Livingston County Jail to file a claim in the courts for injunctive relief and damages pertaining to the tooth. Livingston County Jail denied access to court to the petitioner for civil filing, in which the petitioner was seeking to challenge a prior conviction as well with legal material. The court immediately dismissed the official capacity claims with prejudice, even though the petitioner stated that this was the policy of both jail facilities for these actions. QUESTIONS: 1. Is this the correct evaluation of the evidence for deliberate indifference and would the Monell policy standard be eroded by the evaluation of this case? 2. Do these actions satisfy the actual injury requirement in Lewis v. Casey and hold the strongest argument the complaint suggested by a pro se litigant? 1