Gilligan et al v. Kanive et al

Filing 26

ORDER by Judge Benjamin H Settle ADOPTING IN PART AND DECLINING TO ADOPT IN PART REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 24 Report and Recommendations. (TG; cc mailed to plaintiffs)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

6
7
8

EDWARD PAUL GILLIGAN, et al.,

9

Plaintiffs,

10

v.

11

ROBERTA F. KANIVE, ARNP, et al.,

12

Case No. C11-5061BHS
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION IN
PART AND RE-REFERRING
ACTION

Defendants.

13
14
15
16

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of
the Honorable J. Richard Creatura, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 24).
On December 21, 2010, Plaintiffs Edward Paul Gilligan (“Gilligan”), Steven Lynn

17

Brooks (“Brooks”), Derek James Staton (“Staton”), and Thomas Randel Hargrove

18

(“Hargrove”) filed a civil rights complaint against Defendants Roberta F. Kanive, ARNP;

19

Timothy Panek, ARNP; G. Steven Hammond, Chief Medical Officer; and the Washington

20

State Department and Corrections (“Defendants”) in the Superior Court of Washington for

21

Thurston County. Dkt. 1. On January 21, 2011, the matter was removed to this Court.

22

On May 24, 2011, Gilligan filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss. Dkt. 21. On June 1,

23

2011, Brooks filed a motion to dismiss his action. Dkt. 22. On June 8, 2011, Staton filed a

24

motion to dismiss his action. Dkt. 23. Defendants did not respond to any of these motions.

25

On July 6, 2011, Judge Creatura issued an R&R finding that all plaintiffs wish to be

26

dismissed from the action. Dkt. 24. On August 4, 2011, Defendants filed a motion for

27
28

ORDER – 1

1

summary judgment requesting that the Court grant summary judgment on all of the claims

2

brought by Hargrove. Dkt. 25.

3

The Court adopts the R&R as to Gilligan, Brooks, and Staton. The Court declines to

4

adopt the R&R as to Hargrove because Hargrove has not affirmatively sought dismissal of

5

his claims and Defendants have requested summary judgment on his claims.

6
7

Therefore, the Court has considered the R&R and the remaining record, and no
objections to the R&R having been filed, does hereby find and order as follows:

8

(1)

The R&R is ADOPTED in part;

9

(2)

Gilligan, Brooks, and Staton’s motions (Dkts. 21, 22, & 23) are GRANTED
and their claims against Defendants are DISMISSED; and

10
11

(3)

for summary judgment (Dkt. 25) against Hargrove.

12
13

DATED this 10th day of August, 2011.

14
15

A

BENJAMIN H. SETTLE
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

The action is RE-REFERRED for the consideration of Defendants’ motion

ORDER – 2