WILLIAMS v. OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 2:13-cv-00950-AA. (2014)
Court: District Court, D. Oregon
Number: infdco20140410c60
Visitors: 9
Filed: Apr. 08, 2014
Latest Update: Apr. 08, 2014
Summary: ORDER ANN L. AIKEN, District Judge. The State Defendants now move to dismiss plaintiff's claims against defendants Sprague, Hallman and Kitzhaber. State Defendants' Partial Rule 12 (B) (6) Motion to Dismiss (#57). Plaintiff's motion to dismiss plaintiff's claims against defendants Sprague and Hallman is allowed for the reasons set forth in Judge Simon's Order (#13) entered July 30, 2013. Specifically, plaintiff's claims against these defendants is "more in the nature of a request for reconsid
Summary: ORDER ANN L. AIKEN, District Judge. The State Defendants now move to dismiss plaintiff's claims against defendants Sprague, Hallman and Kitzhaber. State Defendants' Partial Rule 12 (B) (6) Motion to Dismiss (#57). Plaintiff's motion to dismiss plaintiff's claims against defendants Sprague and Hallman is allowed for the reasons set forth in Judge Simon's Order (#13) entered July 30, 2013. Specifically, plaintiff's claims against these defendants is "more in the nature of a request for reconside..
More
ORDER
ANN L. AIKEN, District Judge.
The State Defendants now move to dismiss plaintiff's claims against defendants Sprague, Hallman and Kitzhaber. State Defendants' Partial Rule 12 (B) (6) Motion to Dismiss (#57).
Plaintiff's motion to dismiss plaintiff's claims against defendants Sprague and Hallman is allowed for the reasons set forth in Judge Simon's Order (#13) entered July 30, 2013. Specifically, plaintiff's claims against these defendants is "more in the nature of a request for reconsideration" of the court's dismissal of plaintiff's prior civil rights action, Williams v. Oregon Department of Corrections, Civ. No. 3:10cv-00730-SI.
Defendants motion to dismiss plaintiff's claim against defendant Kitzhaber is allowed because plaintiff has failed to allege that defendant Kitzhaber engaged in any action that deprived plaintiff of of his federally protected rights. See, Stevenson v. Koskey, 877 F.2d 1435, 1439 (9th Cir. 1989); Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d 740 (9th Cir. 1978).
Defendants' Motion (#57) is allowed. Plaintiff's claims against defendants Sprague, Hallman and Kitzhaber are dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
