Infectious Disease Expert Was Allowed to Opine on the Lack of Severe Lung Damage
Posted on December 8, 2025 by Expert Witness Profiler
Roy Edward Ates, Jr., is a federal prisoner. He alleged that prison officials’ negligence caused him to become infected with COVID and that prison personnel were negligent in providing him medical treatment thereafter.
Defendant retained Dr. Alysse Wurcel as an expert witness. She has assisted Massachusetts sheriffs in their response to COVID beginning in March 2020.
Wurcel opined that the BOP’s medical treatment of Ates from December 2020 forward was “evidence-based, guideline-concordant medical care”.
In reaching this conclusion, she further opined that she “would not classify Ates as having ‘severe debilitating lung damage.'” Considering Wurcel’s opinions, no reasonable jury could find an “intentional failure to perform a duty in reckless disregard of the consequences” with respect to the BOP’s treatment of Ates’ medical conditions from December 2020 forward.
Ates argued that Wurcel’s expert opinion on whether Ates has lung dysfunction is not reliable and should not be considered because Wurcel is not qualified to offer such opinion.
Infectious Disease Expert Witness
Dr. Alysse Gail Wurcel is a physician licensed in Massachusetts to practice as an internal medicine and infectious disease specialist. She has worked in Massachusetts jails as an infectious disease specialist since 2013. She has published over 100 articles in peer-reviewed publications, including articles on COVID.
Discussion by the Court
Through her training and experience, Wurcel is able to recognize symptoms of severe lung damage that would require a referral to a specialist, like a pulmonologist.
She testified, “I know when someone has severe lung damage. I mean, in terms of their oxygenation saturation, in terms of lots of other things, an internal medicine doctor can know when someone has severe lung damage.”
Explaining the basis for such knowledge, Wurcel testified:
I guess, like, this is the existential infectious diseases debate that you get into, in that we are doctors of everything. And if there’s an infection of the lungs, it’s called a pneumonia, and COVID causes, in some people, an infection of the lungs. And so, like, I’m not a lung doctor, but I am a lung doctor when an infection is in it. So any infection hits the lungs, then I’m a lung doctor.
She further explained that “you don’t send every person that believes they have something to a specialist. The internal medicine doctor has a certain level of understanding to triage.”
Wurcel observed multiple exams when Ates’ lungs were clear and his pulse oximetry readings were good. Wurcel further opined that from these and other objective symptoms documented in the medical records, “any internal medicine doctor would look at this case and say this man does not have severe lung damage.”
Analysis
While Wurcel is not a pulmonologist and did not hold herself out to be a specialist on lung dysfunction, her training and experience provided sufficient foundation for her to opine that, based on her review of Ates’ deposition transcript, discovery responses, and medical records, Ates did not have severe lung damage. This opinion supported her conclusion that the BOP provided Ates “evidence-based, guideline concordant medical care.”
Ates contended that Wurcel did not know about or did not take into consideration his claim that his medical records often failed to reflect his complaints of breathing problems. Even accepting Ates’ claim at face value, as the Court must on summary judgment, it did not warrant rejection of Wurcel’s opinions.
Held
The Court admitted the testimony of Defendant’s expert Dr. Alysse Wurcel because she is an experienced physician licensed to practice internal medicine and treat infectious diseases.
Key Takeaway
As Wurcel aptly explained, internal medicine doctors like her regularly make the initial assessment as to whether a patient has symptom that warrant referral to a specialist, such as a pulmonologist. Wurcel unequivocally opined both in her written report and during her deposition that, based on information in Ates’ medical records, she saw no indication that he did in fact have lung damage, or any basis for referring him to an outside specialist for further evaluation.
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | Ates V. United States Of America |
| Docket Number: | 2:21cv418 |
| Court Name: | United States District Court, Indiana Southern |
| Order Date: | December 05, 2025 |
