Manos et al v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al

Filing 108

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Patrick J. Schiltz on 2/6/2020. (CLG)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Tatyana Manos, Allison Marshall, and Ronnie Robert Molina, Civil No. 18-cv-0427 (PJS/HB) Plaintiffs, v. Federal Bureau of Prisons; Eric Holder, former Attorney General, in his individual and official capacities; Loretta Lynch, former Attorney General, in her individual and official capacities; Sally Yates, former acting Attorney General, in her individual and official capacities; Jefferson Sessions, former Attorney General, in his individual and official capacities; Matthew Whitaker, acting Attorney General, in his individual and official capacities; Harley G. Lapin, former BOP Director, in his official capacity; Charles E. Samuels, Jr., former BOP Director, in his official capacity; Thomas R. Kane, former Interim BOP Director, in his official capacity; Mark S. Inch, former BOP Director, in his official capacity; Hugh J. Hurwitz, acting BOP Director, in his official capacity; John Doe No. 1, former North Central Regional BOP Director, in his official capacity; John Doe No. 2, former North Central Regional BOP Director, in his official capacity; Jeffrey E. Krueger, North Central Regional BOP Director, in his official capacity; John Doe No. 3, former South Central Regional Director, in his official capacity; John Doe No. 4, former DSCC Director, in his official capacity; Kethleen Kenney, BOP General Counsel, in her official capacity; Scott Fisher, former BOP Warden, in his individual and official capacities; M. Travis Bragg, former BOP ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Warden, in his official capacity; Sandy Jett, former BOP Warden, in his individual and official capacities; John Doe No. 5, former acting BOP Warden, in his individual and official capacities; L. LaRiva, former BOP Warden, in his official capacity; John Doe No. 6, former acting BOP Warden, in his individual and official capacities; David Paul, former BOP Warden, in his individual and official capacities; and John and Jane Does 7– 15, Defendants. The above-entitled matter came before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. No objections have been filed to the Report and Recommendation in the time period permitted. Based upon the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED; 2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 77] is GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART, and DENIED AS MOOT IN PART as follows: a. The motion is GRANTED as to Tatyana Manos’s and Allison Marshall’s claims against Defendants in their official capacities, and those should claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; b. The motion is DENIED as to Ronnie Molina’s official capacity claim challenging the 300-minute monthly telephone call restriction 2 under the First, Fifth, and Eighth Amendments; c. The motion is GRANTED as to Ronnie Molina’s official capacity claim that that he has been adversely affected by the BOP’s administrative remedy process in violation of the APA and the Fifth and Eighth Amendments, and that claim is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; d. The motion should is GRANTED as to Ronnie Molina’s official capacity claim that the lack of an FMC in the western region violates the APA and the Eighth Amendment, and that claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; e. The motion is DENIED AS MOOT as to former Plaintiff Theodore Manos because his claims have been dismissed without prejudice; and 3. All remaining claims against Defendants in their individual capacities are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Dated: 2/6/20 s/Patrick J. Schiltz PATRICK J. SCHILTZ United States District Judge 3

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?