Turner #148089 v. Curtin et al

Filing 15

ORDER REGARDING PARTIAL SERVICE: dismissing Defendant Van Buren be dismissed with prejudice; dismissing Defendants Caruso and Pratt with prejudice; Defendants Hornkohl and Pierson dismissed with prejudice; the Clerk is to arrange for service of this order and the complaint; signed by Chief Judge Paul L. Maloney (Chief Judge Paul L. Maloney, aeb)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

DEREK TURNER, Plaintiff, v. CINDI S. CURTIN et al., Defendants. ____________________________________/ ORDER FOR PARTIAL SERVICE In accordance with the Opinion filed this date: IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's action against Defendant Van Buren be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e) and 1915A, and 42 U.S.C. § 1997e, because she is immune. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's action against Defendants Caruso and Pratt be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e) and 1915A, and 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(c). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's action against Defendants Hornkohl and Pierson be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e) and 1915A, and 42 U.S.C. § 1997e, with the exception of Plaintiff's retaliation claim. Case No. 1:09-cv-665 Honorable Paul L. Maloney

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall arrange for service of summons and amended complaint (docket #13), along with a copy of this order, upon Defendants Hornkohl and Pierson. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Hornkohl and Pierson shall reply to the complaint by way of answer, motion to dismiss, or motion for summary judgment within the time allowed by law. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(g)(1). Defendants need only respond to Plaintiff's surviving retaliation claim.

Dated:

January 13, 2010

/s/ Paul L. Maloney Paul L. Maloney Chief United States District Judge

-2-