RODRIGUEZ v. BRYSON et al

Filing 84

ORDER ADOPTING in part and REJECTING as moot in part 14 Report and Recommendations; GRANTING 39 Motion to Amend/Correct; DENYING 11 Motion for TRO/Motion for Preliminary Injunction. The following claims are allowed to proceed for further factual development: (1) Religious freedom claims against Defendants Bryson, Sellers, Chatman, Caldwell, Sutton, Martin, Bishop, Powell, and McCloud; (2) Eighth Amendment claims regarding contaminated food against Defendants Sutton, Martin, Chatman, and Caldwell; (3) Eighth Amendment claims regarding nutritionally inadequate meals against Defendants Bryson, Sellers, Chatman, Caldwell, Sutton, and Martin; (4) Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference to medical care claims regarding dental care against Defendants Adair, Gore, Burnside, Reid, Forts, Butts, Lewis, and Chatman; (5) Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference to medical care claims regarding Rodriguezs shoulder injury against Defendants Burnside, Bishop, Powell, and Williams; and (6) the retaliation claims against Defendant Burnside. Additionally, the following claims are now also allowed to proceed for further factual development: (1) Religious freedom claims against Defendants Logan, Thorn ton, Cannon, Hunter, and Dozier; (2) Eighth Amendment claims regarding contaminated food against Defendants Thornton and Cannon; (3) Eight Amendment claims regarding nutritionally inadequate meals against Defendants Dozier, Logan, Thornton, McCloud, and Cannon; (4) Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference to medical care claims regarding dental care against Defendants Dozier, Bryson, and Sellers; (5) Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference to medical care claims regarding Rodriguezs shoulder in jury against Defendant Chatman; and (6) The equal protection claims against Defendants Bryson, Dozier, Sellers, Chatman, Caldwell, Thornton, Sutton, Martin, Bishop, Logan, and Powell. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that service be made on these newly nam ed Defendants and on the current Defendants concerning the additional claims. It is also ORDERED that those Defendants file an answer or other response as may be appropriate under Rule 12, 28 U.S.C. § 1915, and the PLRA. Finally, Rodriguezs remaining claims are DISMISSED without prejudice. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE MARC THOMAS TREADWELL on 1/25/2018. (tlh)