Uduko v. Cozzens et al

Filing 114

ORDER Regarding 86 Motion to Dismiss; 87 Motion to Dismiss; and 100 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by District Judge Victoria A. Roberts. (LVer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
OKECHUKWU UDUKO,
Plaintiff,
v.

CASE NUMBER: 11-13765
HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

STEPHEN E. COZZENS, et al.,
Defendants
________________________________________________/
ORDER
Before the Court are Defendants Magulick, Terris, and Guidry’s motions to dismiss
Plaintiff Uduko’s Complaint for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
12(b)(6). (Dkt. 86, 87, and 100 respectively). The Court adopted the Magistrate Judge’s Report
and Recommendation regarding Defendants Cozzens, Curtis, Aviles, Ellis, Brown, Cheatham,
Toney, Duby, Dolber, Downing, Murdock, Bozeman, Gubbins, Zych, Smith, Doty, and
Guittierrez’s motions to dismiss (Dkt. 110). Magulick, Terris, and Guidry join in the other
Defendants’ earlier motions to dismiss and adopt their arguments.
The Court refers to its prior order and makes the same ruling with respect to Magulick,
Terris, and Guidry’s motions to dismiss.
Accordingly, the following claims are dismissed:
1.) Bivens conspiracy claim in Count 13.
2.) § 1985(3) conspiracy claim in Count 14.
The following claims will proceed to trial:
1.) All retaliation claims (Counts 1, 2, 4-9, 12, and 13).

1

2.) All First Amendment/RFRA/RLUIPA claims (Counts 3, 10, and 11).
3.) Bivens conspiracy claim in Count 1.
4.) Discrimination claims (Counts 13 and Count 14–against Cozzens only).
Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity on Uduko's First
Amendment/RFRA/RLUIPA claims or retaliation claims.
IT IS ORDERED.

/s/ Victoria A. Roberts
Victoria A. Roberts
United States District Judge
Dated: October 1, 2013
The undersigned certifies that a copy of this
document was served on the attorneys of record
and Okechukwu Uduko by electronic means or
U.S. Mail on October 1, 2013.
S/Linda Vertriest
Deputy Clerk

2