Whether the plaintiff's allegation of denial of Eighth Amendment right to serious medical need for COVID-19 vaccine fails to satisfy Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2)

Questions Presented i . : 1. On February 1, 2021, PLAINTIFF an inmate in the custody of VADOC, | was denied his eigth amendment right to a "serious medical need" in terms of recieving the " WOderna/VACCINE" to combat Covid-19. The District Court, dismissed the petition on the grounds, that, PLAINTIFF failed to establish that DEFENDANT was deliberate indifferent. And the Court of Appeals, Affirmed the lower court's decision. How does this '. allegation fails to satisfy FED. R. Civ. P. Rule 8(a)(2) 7 2. In 1932, the U.S. Public Health Services begins the "Tuskegee" study of untreated syphilis, in the Negro male with 600 subjects approximately two thirds of whom had syphilis. The subjects are told only thatthey are being treated for "bad blood". 100 die from the disease, it was later ; . revealed that for research purposes the men were denied drugs that could have saved them. Would this state a claim. of "deliberate indifference"? 3. PLAINTIFF contends in the midst of a "GLOBAL PANDEMIC", given the fact that on (ACC), at the time of this "Dehumanizing Deprevation", there oo were over six-hundred inmate's who tested. positive, six deaths, and multiple hospitilizations. : How does denying PLAINTIFF a "serious medical need", due to his name sallegedly not being "highlighted", constitutes a LEGITIMATE \PENOLOGICAL 4 i 1 "justification ? . . | | (4)