Ortiz v. Messinger

Filing 82

ORDER - In accord with the accompanying Memorandum 81 : 1. Dfts mtn to dismiss 71 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:a. GRANTED as to Pltfs official and individual capacity claims brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of F ederal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and these claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;b. GRANTED as to Pltfs official capacity claim brought under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb-2000bb-4, and this claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;c. DENIED as to Pltfs individual capacity claim brought under RFRA, and the above-captioned action shall proceed on this claim;2. Pltfs mtns for the appointment of counsel 75 and 80 are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; 3. Dft SHALL FILE an answer to the complaint in accordance with the FRCP;4. The parties shall complete discovery by 10/28/24; and5. The parties shall file dispositive mtns, if any, on or before 12/30/24. Signed by Honorable Sylvia H. Rambo on 3/26/24 (ma)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
EDWARD ORTIZ,
Plaintiff
v.
LEWIS MESSINGER,
Defendant

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

No. 1:23-cv-00315
(Judge Rambo)

ORDER
AND NOW, on this 26th day of March 2024, upon consideration of
Defendant Lewis Messinger (“Defendant”)’s motion to dismiss, filed pursuant to
Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Doc. No. 71), and Plaintiff
Edward Ortiz (“Plaintiff”)’s motions for the appointment of counsel (Doc. Nos. 75,
80), and in accordance with the accompanying Memorandum, IT IS ORDERED
THAT:
1.

Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 71) is GRANTED in part
and DENIED in part as follows:
a.

Defendant’s motion (Doc. No. 71) is GRANTED as to
Plaintiff’s official and individual capacity claims brought under
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of
Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and these claims are
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;

b.

Defendant’s motion (Doc. No. 71) is GRANTED as to
Plaintiff’s official capacity claim brought under the Religious
Freedom Restoration Act (“RFRA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb2000bb-4, and this claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;

c.

Defendant’s motion (Doc. No. 71) is DENIED as to Plaintiff’s
individual capacity claim brought under RFRA, and the abovecaptioned action shall proceed on this claim;

2.

Plaintiff’s motions for the appointment of counsel (Doc. Nos. 75, 80)
are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;

3.

Defendant SHALL FILE an answer to the complaint in accordance
with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;

4.

The parties shall complete discovery by October 28, 2024; and

5.

The parties shall file dispositive motions, if any, on or before
December 30, 2024.
s/ Sylvia H. Rambo
SYLVIA H. RAMBO
United States District Judge

2