Mendez v. FMC Minnesota et al
ORDER ADOPTING 24 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; Plaintiff's Objections 25 are OVERRULED; Defendants' Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment 8 is GRANTED (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Ann D. Montgomery on 05/26/2017. (TLU) cc: Raphael Mendez. Modified on 5/26/2017 (las).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Civil No. 16-845 ADM/BRT
FMC Minnesota et al., Lt. Holbus (SHU),
Officer Kepp, Eberle Reporting Employee,
A. Culberbon Report Delivering Person, and
Any Other UNKNOWN Individual Such as the Property
R and D Operation,
Raphael Mendez, pro se.
Erin M. Secord, Assistant United States Attorney, United States Attorney’s Office, Minneapolis,
MN, on behalf of Defendants.
On March 31, 2016, pro se Plaintiff Raphael Mendez (“Mendez”) initiated this 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 Complaint [Docket No. 1], arguing that he was improperly disciplined for failing to
provide a urine sample while detained at FMC Rochester. Mendez contends that he was
“tortured” when Defendants placed him in the Segregated Housing Unit (“SHU”) for six days.
Compl. 1, 3–6.
On March 10, 2017, Magistrate Judge Becky R. Thorson recommended treating
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 8] as one for summary
judgment and granting the motion. See R & R [Docket No. 24] (“R&R”). In the R&R, Judge
Thorson concluded that (1) Mendez’s claims against the individual defendants must be construed
as official capacity claims, and (2) the United States is the real party in interest to the claims
against Defendants “FMC Minnesota” and “the Property R and D Operation.” R&R at 10.
Thus, all of Mendez’s claims are barred by sovereign immunity. Judge Thorson additionally
concluded that even if the claims were not barred by sovereign immunity, they nevertheless lack
On March 17, 2017, Mendez filed an Objection [Docket No. 25] to the R&R. In his
Objection, Mendez questions the authenticity of the R&R, disputes the relevance of the factual
background recited in the R&R, recharacterizes the claims he is asserting, contests the
application of sovereign immunity, and argues that the R&R omitted facts crucial to his claims.
Upon conducting a de novo review of the record, the R&R, and the Objection, the Court
agrees with Judge Thorson that all of Mendez’s claims are barred by sovereign immunity. The
Court further agrees with Judge Thorson that even if sovereign immunity did not apply, each of
Mendez’s claims is meritless.
Based upon the foregoing, and all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that:
Mendez’s Objections [Docket No. 25] to Magistrate Judge Becky R.
Thorson’s Report and Recommendation [Docket No. 24] are
The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED in full; and
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment [Docket No. 8]
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
BY THE COURT:
s/Ann D. Montgomery
ANN D. MONTGOMERY
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: May 26, 2017.
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?