Sevier v. Bergum et al
ORDER by Chief Judge Daniel L. Hovland ADOPTING 4 Report and Recommendations and dismissing case without prejudice; finding as moot 5 Motion; finding as moot 17 Motion for Summary Judgment; finding as moot 18 Motion for Leave to File; finding as moot 21 Motion for Summary Judgment; finding as moot 22 Motion.(MM) Distributed on 11/27/2017 (cjs).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
Case No. 1:17-cv-255
Doug Burgum, in his official capacity as
Governor of North Dakota, et. al.,
The Plaintiff initiated this pro se action on October 23, 2017. See Docket No. 1. After
screening the 549-page complaint as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), Magistrate Judge Charles
S. Miller, Jr. issued a Report and Recommendation on October 31, 2017, in which he recommended
the complaint be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted. See Docket No. 4. The parties were given fourteen (14) days to file any objections to the
Report and Recommendation. Servier filed an objection on November 20, 2017. See Docket No.
16. Along with his objection, Servier filed an amended complaint and a number of motions.
The Court has carefully reviewed the Report and Recommendation, Servier’s objection, the
relevant case law, the complaint, the amended complaint, and the entire record, and finds the Report
and Recommendation to be persuasive. The Court agrees with Judge Miller that the complaint is
frivolous. The amended complaint also fails to state any cognizable claims.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 4) in its
entirety and ORDERS the case DISMISSED without prejudice. All pending motions (Docket Nos.
5, 17, 18, 21, and 22) are deemed MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 27th day of November, 2017.
/s/ Daniel L. Hovland
Daniel L. Hovland, Chief Judge
United States District Court
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?