1. This case presents an important question of federal law to resolve: in order to overcome qualified immunity and proceed on a claim of deliberate interference to a medical need, can a plaintiff present facts demonstrating that the care provided was clearly inadequate, or is the provision of any treatment—no matter how inadequate—legally sufficient to preclude an Eighth Amendment violation.

Whether the Eighth Amendment requires a substantive inquiry into the adequacy of medical treatment provided to prisoners, or if the mere provision of any treatment categorically precludes a deliberate indifference claim