Grindling v. Diana et al
ORDER ADOPTING IN PART AND MODIFYING IN PART MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 5 - Signed by JUDGE ALAN C. KAY on 10/17/2016. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Chris Grindling shall be served by first class mail at the address of record on October 18, 2016.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
CHRIS GRINDLING ,
MICHEAL DIANA and LOT
CV 16-00424 ACK-KJM
ORDER ADOPTING IN PART AND MODIFYING IN PART MAGISTRATE
JUDGE’S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
Findings and Recommendation having been filed and served on all parties
on September 12, 2016, and no objections having been filed by any party,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, pursuant to Title 28,
United States Code, Section 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 74.2, the "Findings and
Recommendation to Deny the Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and to
Dismiss the Complaint With Leave to Amend" (“F&R”), as modified herein,
Docket No. 5, are adopted as the opinion and order of this Court.1
The title of the F&R improperly indicates that the entire Complaint is
dismissed with leave to amend. The Court modifies the F&R to clarify that the
Prison Rape Elimination Act claims, along with the due process claim related to
the confiscation of Plaintiff’s items, a cause of action the Magistrate Judge discerns
from the Complaint, are dismissed with prejudice.
Furthermore, the Court modifies the F&R to allow Plaintiff to assert pendent
state claims of theft with respect to his property being taken, as well as assault and
battery with respect to his sexual harassment claims (assuming that federal
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, October 17, 2016.
Alan C. Kay
Sr. United States District Judge
jurisdiction is established; otherwise, Plaintiff may file those claims in state court).
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?