Samuels v. Davis et al

Filing 63

ORDER: The Magistrate Judge's Recommendation 57 is correct. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 15 is granted and Plaintiff's Amended Complaint 10 is dismissed with prejudice, by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 6/22/2015. (ebuch)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
LEWIS T. BABCOCK, JUDGE
Civil Case No. 14-cv-02588-LTB-KLM
KENDRICK SAMUELS,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN L. DAVIS,
PATRICIA BALDWIN,
KERRI BARONI,
RICHARD FISHER,
BRADLEY JOHNSON,
KERRY BYNES,
THOMAS C. FISHER, M.D.,
CHRISTINE STURGEON, N.P.,
VALERIE EGLEY, R.N.,
BETTY KASPAR, R.N.,
AMY KAMMERZELL, R.N.,
MEGGAN EGLINTON,
JEFFREY HANSEN,
NANCY DAVIS,
Defendants.
________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
________________________________________________________________________

The Magistrate Judge recommends that the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc 15)
be granted and that Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc 10) be dismissed with prejudice.
The Plaintiff has filed specific written objections to the Magistrate Judge’s
Recommendation. The Defendants Warden Davis, Baldwin, Baroni, Fisher, Johnson,
Bynes, Sturgeon, Kaspar, Kammerzell, Eglinton, Hansen, and Nancy Davis have filed their
response to the Plaintiff’s objections. Defendant Thomas C. Fisher, M.D., has filed his
1

independent response to the Plaintiff’s objections. Finally, Plaintiff has filed his reply in
support of his objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation of dismissal.
Accordingly, I have reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation de novo in
light of the file and record in this case. On de novo review, I conclude that the Magistrate
Judge’s Recommendation is correct. Accordingly
IT IS ORDERED that the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc 15) is GRANTED and
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc 10) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

BY THE COURT:

s/Lewis T. Babcock
Lewis T. Babcock, Judge
DATED: June 22, 2015

2