Little et al v. Mottern et al

Filing 221

ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry)- IT IS ORDERED that Defendants motions 174 & 175 to dismiss and/or for summaryjudgment are GRANTED. Pltf Littles claims against Defendants Holland, Hubbardand Middleton are DISMISSED fo r lack of personal jurisdiction. The claims of Pltf Little & Pltf Milhouse against Defendants Thomas, Butler, Heath, Entzel and Taggart are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may begranted pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) without furth er leave to file a fourth amended complaint. The claims of Pltf Little & Pltf Milhouse against the UnitedStates under the FTCA are DISMISSED for failure to exhaust their administrative tort remedies. The claims of Pltf Little & Pltf Milhouse against Mottern, Boussag, Loyek, Eck, Dowkus and Diltz under Bivens areDISMISSED for failure to exhaust their administrative remedies. The claims against the Federal Bureau of Prison are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under Rule 12(b)(6). Pltf Littles motion 165 for summary judgment is DENIED. Pltf Milhouses motion 189 for summary judgment is DENIED. Pltf Milhouses so-called motion 202 to proceed as a John Doe and his motion 206 for a copy of Defendants motion forsummary judgment are DENIED. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case andterminate any other motions pending on the docket. Signed by Honorable Yvette Kane on 3/7/17. (rw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MICHAEL L. LITTLE, et al.,
Plaintiffs
vs.
B. MOTTERN, et al.,
Defendants

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

No. 1:14-CV-00953
(Judge Kane)

ORDER
AND NOW, on this 7th day of March 2017, in accordance
with the accompanying memorandum, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. Defendants’ motions to dismiss and/or for summary
judgment (Doc. Nos. 174, 175), are GRANTED as set forth
below;
2. Little’s claims against Defendants Holland, Hubbard
and Middleton are DISMISSED for lack of personal
jurisdiction;
3. The claims of Little and Milhouse against Defendants
Thomas, Butler, Heath, Entzel and Taggart are DISMISSED
for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) without further leave
to file a fourth amended complaint;
4.

The claims of Little and Milhouse against the United

States under the FTCA are DISMISSED for failure to
exhaust their administrative tort remedies;
5.

The claims of Little and Milhouse against Mottern,

Boussag, Loyek, Eck, Dowkus and Diltz under Bivens are

DISMISSED for failure to exhaust their administrative
remedies;
6. The claims against the Federal Bureau of Prison are
DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted under Rule 12(b)(6);
7.

Little’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 165),

is DENIED;
8.

Milhouse’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No.

189), is DENIED;
9.

Milhouse’s so-called motion to proceed as a “John

Doe” and his motion for a copy of Defendants’ motion for
summary judgment (Doc. Nos. 202, 206), are DENIED;1 and
10. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case and
terminate any other motions pending on the docket.
s/ Yvette Kane
Yvette Kane, District Judge
United States District Court
Middle District of Pennsylvania

1. In filing the so-called motion to proceed as a “John Doe,”
Milhouse is attempting to seal his identity so that when other
inmates perform legal research they will not be made aware of it.
Milhouse did not seek “John Doe” status at the time the case was
filed and the docket of this case has been open to the public
since 2014. The court concludes it would be improper to redact
Milhouse’s name from the docket by substituting “John Doe” at
this time. With respect to Milhouse’s motion for a copy of
Defendants’ motions for summary judgment and exhibits Milhouse
claims they “mysteriously disappeared after a random shakedown
conducted [on} October 9, 2016,” which was well after the motion
became ripe for disposition.
2