RUFFIN v. HINKLEY et al

Filing 19

ORDER affirming and adopting Report and Recommended Decision re 10 Screening Complaint Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e), 1915A. By JUDGE NANCY TORRESEN. (MMB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE

DANIEL ONEIL RUFFIN,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN HINKLEY, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil No. 2:17-CV-151-NT

ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED
DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On May 30, 2017, the United States Magistrate Judge filed with the court, with
copy to the Plaintiff, his Recommended Decision after a preliminary review of the
Plaintiff’s Complaint under 28 U.S.C.§ 1915. Recommended Decision (ECF No. 10).
The Plaintiff filed an objection to the Recommended Decision on June 12, 2017 (ECF
No. 12). I have reviewed and considered the Recommended Decision, together with
the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by
the Recommended Decision. I concur with the recommendations of the United States
Magistrate Judge and I will affirm the Recommended Decision in all respects.
It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate
Judge is hereby AFFIRMED. I DISMISS the Plaintiff’s diet-related free exercise
and RLUIPA claims, and the Plaintiff’s due process claim, but permit Plaintiff to
proceed on his claims based on the denial of religious items and the denial of

minimum security housing. Therefore, I DISMISS the Plaintiff’s claims against the
Defendants Warren Heat, Heidi Norweg, David Palmer, and Bruce Sheaff,
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Nancy Torresen__________________
United States Chief District Judge
Dated this 6th day of July, 2017

2