Hedin v. Castillo et al

Filing 100

OPINION AND ORDER: The court ADOPTS Judge Clarke's F&R 97 with the clarification discussed in the Opinion and Order. Signed on 3/26/2020 by Judge Ann L. Aiken. (ck)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION

TERRY PAUL HEDIN,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 3: 14-cv-01504-CL
OPINION AND ORDER

vs.
JUAN D. CASTILLO; Regional
Director; lVIARION FEATHER, �7arden
FCI Sheridan; RICHARD KOWALCZYK,
Head Chaplain FCI Sheridan; DANIEL
WILLAMS, Chaplain FCI Sheridan,
Defendants.

AIKEN, District Judge:
United States Magistrate Judge Mark Clarke issued his Findings and
Recommendation ("F&R") (doc. 97) in this case on January 30, 2020. In the F&R,
Judge Clarke recommended that defendants' Motion to Dismiss and/or Motion for
Summary Judgment (doc. 88) be granted in part and denied in part. The matter is

Page 1 - OPINION AND ORDER

now before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l) and Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 72(b).
Plaintiff filed timely objections. Accordingly, the Court must "make a de novo
determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or
recommendations to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l); Fed. R. Civ. P.
72(b)(3); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v.

Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en bane).
Plaintiff objects only to Judge Clarke's recommendation that, because the
named defendants have either retired from BOP or transferred to other BOP
facilities, {{plaintiff must amend his complaint to name the proper official-capacity
defendants - presumably FCI Sheridan officials" for injunctive relief. F&R at 9, 11.
Plaintiff argues that, under Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the
uproper official-capacity defendants for purposes of [plaintiffs] claims for injunctive
relief are already automatically substituted as parties with no further need for
amendment" by plaintiff. Obj. (doc. 99) at 2.
Rule 25(d) provides
An action does not abate vvhen a public officer who is a party in an
official capacity dies, resigns, or otherwise ceases to hold office while the
action is pending. The officer's successor is automatically substituted as
a party, Later proceedings should be in the substituted party's name,
but any misnomer not affecting the parties' substantial rights must be
disregarded, The court may order substitution at any time, but the
absence of such an order does not affect the substitution.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d). Thus, plaintiff need not file an amended complaint to substitute
the named defendants from the case as official-capacity defendants. However, the

Page 2 - OPINION AND ORDER

Court will wait for the parties to supply the names of the new Regional Director,
Warden, Supervisory Chaplain and director of Religious Services, and Chaplain in
charge of overseeing the Asatru faith group by filing a stipulated proposed order of
substitution before substituting the new official-capacity defendants.
Having reviewed the F&R and record, the Court find no error in Judge Clarke's
reasoning. Accordingly, the court ADOPTS Judge Clarke's F&R (doc. 97) with the
clarification discussed above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
+

Dated this 1/o

a'ay of March 2020.

Ann Aiken
United States District Judge

Page 3 - OPINION AND ORDER