Koch v. Carlisle et al

Filing 29

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 28 of Magistrate Judge Bernard M. Jones...defendants' motion to dismiss 22 is denied. Signed by Honorable Joe Heaton on 3/24/2017. (cla)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA CHRISTOPHER E. KOCH, Plaintiff, vs. JOHN CARLISLE, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NO. CIV-15-0811-HE ORDER Plaintiff Christopher E. Koch, a state prisoner appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 asserting violations of his rights under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000-cc, et seq. This matter was referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge Bernard M. Jones for initial proceedings consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Judge Jones has recommended that defendants’ motion be denied, on the basis plaintiff has not pleaded facts in his complaint from which it can be plausibly inferred that he has stated claims for relief. The parties were advised of their right to object to the Report and Recommendation by March 23, 2017. No objection to the Report and Recommendation has been received. The parties have therefore waived any right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues it addressed. Casanova v. Ulibarri, 595 F.3d 1120, 1123 (10th Cir. 2010); see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Accordingly, the court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation [Doc. # 28]. Defendants’ motion to dismiss [Doc. #22] is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 24th day of March, 2017. 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?