Plaintiffs injuries consisted of a “spasm of [his] neck muscles” and “some soreness of [his] lower back,” though he retained “NL [normal] ambulation.” (Pl.’s Ltr. at unnumbered 2.) Plaintiffs injuries are not sufficiently serious for two reasons. First, rather than being of the nature of “death, degeneration, or extreme pain,” Chance, 143 F.3d a N.Y.2007) (finding the prisoner’s torn meniscus, for which he was treated by surgery, was not “a ’serious medical need’ for Eighth Amendment purposes”), aff'd, 324 Fed.Appx. 144 (2d Cir.2009). Along these lines, “subjective complaints of pain are not sufficient to satisfy [the serious medical need] standard.” Thomas v. Nassau Cty. Corr. Ctr., 288 F.Supp.2d 333, 338 (E.D.N.Y.2003); see also Evan v. Manos, 336 F.Supp.2d 255, 260 (W.D.N.Y.2004) (<HOLDING>). Second, according to a “Medication Order”
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 act of slamming  is objectively sufficiently serious to state a claim for relief under the eighth amendment alterations and some internal quotation marks omitted recognizing probable cause as complete defense to a claim of malicious prosecution in new york internal quotation marks and brackets omitted holding that deliberate indifference to a serious medical need establishes an eighth amendment violation holding that the electronic submission of information across state lines qualifies as in or affecting interstate commerce internal quotation marks and brackets omitted