Smuda v. Anderson et al

Filing 90

ORDER ADOPTING 63 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS; denying 33 Motion to Dismiss; denying 40 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; denying 43 Motion for Default Judgment; denying 45 Motion for Default Judgment; and granting 51 Motion to rule on pending motions.(SH)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA Richard Allen Smuda, Plaintiff, Case No. 3:16-cv-335 -vsORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Leann Bertsch, Director, North Dakota Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, in her official capacity, et al., Defendants. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the court has received a Report and Recommendation from the Honorable Alice R. Senechal, United States Magistrate Judge.1 The Report and Recommendation recommends that the defendants’ motions to dismiss for insufficient service of process be denied; that the plaintiff’s motions for default judgment be denied; and the plaintiff’s motion to rule on the aforementioned pending motions be granted. No party has filed objections to the Report and Recommendation within the prescribed time period. Upon consideration, the court hereby adopts the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. For the reasons set forth in the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation, the defendants’ motions to dismiss for insufficient service of process2 are DENIED; the plaintiff’s motions for default judgment3 are DENIED; and the plaintiff’s motion to rule 1 Doc. #63. 2 Docs. #33 & #40. 3 Docs. #43 & #45. 1 on the identified pending motions4 is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 20th day of September, 2017. /s/ Ralph R. Erickson Ralph R. Erickson, District Judge United States District Court 4 Doc. #51. 2

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?