702, Plaintiffs injuries, - according to the Injury Report, were treatable with over-the-counter pain medication and an injection, (see Pl.’s Ltr. at unnumbered 2). Plaintiff does not allege otherwise or that he suffered any permanent harm. See, e.g., Sloane v. Borawski, 64 F.Supp.3d 473, 494 (W.D.N.Y.2014) (finding that, even if the defendant did ignore the claimed “broken ribs, ankle fracture and lower right-side back injury,” the “plaintiff cannot meet the objective component of an Eighth Amendment violation”); Alster v. Goord, 745 F.Supp.2d 317, 337 (S.D.N.Y.2010) (“Because hospital records reveal no fractures or dislocation, this injury is not sufficiently serious to meet the objective prong of the Eighth Amendment standard.”); Dallio v. Hebert, 678 F.Supp.2d 35, 44 (N.D.N.Y.2009) (<HOLDING>); Johnson v. Wright, 477 F.Supp.2d 572, 575
holding that charging fees for medical services did not violate the eighth amendment where prisoner did not allege denial of medical care holding that deliberate indifference to a serious medical need establishes an eighth amendment violation holding that two black eyes bruising in the kidney area kick marks open lacerations headache and numbness did not constitute serious medical need for eighth amendment purposes holding that an assertion of pain sensation alone unaccompanied by any large medical complications does not amount to a serious medical need under the eighth amendment brackets and internal quotation marks omitted holding that the eighth amendment protects prisoners only from deliberate indifference to their serious medical needs