Wylie v. Carochi et al

Filing 47

ORDER: The Magistrate Judge's thorough analysis and 41 Recommendation is correct. The Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 20 is granted and this action is dismissed, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 6/30/2014. (eseam)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, JUDGE
Civil Action No. 13-cv-02189-LTB-BNB
JAMES P. WYLIE,
Plaintiff,
v.
TONY CAROCHI, CDOC Interim Executive Director,
JAMES FALK, SCF Warden,
Defendants.
________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
________________________________________________________________________

THIS MATTER is before me on the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that
the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc 20) be granted. Specifically, the Magistrate Judge
concludes that the motion should be granted to the extent it seeks dismissal of all claims
against Defendants in their official capacities for retroactive monetary relief.

The

Magistrate Judge then concludes that the Plaintiff’s claim for injunctive relief against the
Defendants should be dismissed as moot and the claims against Defendants in their official
capacity should be dismissed entirely. The Magistrate Judge then concludes that because
the Plaintiff has failed to meet the subjective component of deliberate indifference, the
motion should be granted insofar as it seeks dismissal of the Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment
claims. The Magistrate goes on to conclude that the Plaintiff has failed to show a
constitutionally cognizable liberty interest violated by his placement in a holding cell
pursuant to Operational Memorandum 300-123 so the Plaintiff’s due process claims should

be dismissed. Finally, the Magistrate Judge concludes that the motion to dismiss should
be granted insofar as it seeks dismissal of the Plaintiff’s request for compensatory
damages. And in conclusion, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the Defendants’
Motion to Dismiss (Doc 20) be granted. The Recommendation was issued and served on
May 13, 2014.
The Plaintiff has now, having been given extensions of time to respond to the
Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation, has filed his specific objections to the
Recommendation. I therefore review the Recommendation de novo in light of the file and
record in this case. On de novo review, I conclude that the Magistrate Judge’s thorough
analysis and recommendation is correct. Accordingly
IT IS ORDERED that the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc 20) is GRANTED and
the above action is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

s/Lewis T. Babcock
Lewis T. Babcock, Judge
DATED:

June 30, 2014