Hill v. Ortiz

Full title: PHILIP HILL, Plaintiff, v. JOE ORTIZ, CORRECTIONAL CORPORATION OF AMERICA…

Court: United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: May 9, 2008

Civil Case No. 07-cv-00571-LTB-CBS (D. Colo. May. 9, 2008)

Opinion

Civil Case No. 07-cv-00571-LTB-CBS.

May 9, 2008

ORDER

LEWIS BABCOCK, Chief District Judge

This case is before me upon the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that (1) Defendant Ortiz' Motion to Dismiss (Doc 37 — filed October 17, 2007) be granted; (2) Defendant Ortiz be dismissed from this civil action; (3) Claim Two for violation of the Fourteenth Amendment be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; (4) Defendants Miller and Schoenmakers be dismissed from this civil action pursuant to Rule 4(m) for failure to effect service and pursuant to D.C.COLO.LR 41.1 for failure to prosecute; and (5) Defendants John and Jane Doe be dismissed from this civil action. Plaintiff has filed timely written objections to the Magistrate Judge's recommendation (Doc 76).

I have considered the Plaintiff's objections in light of the Magistrate Judge's recommendation, the record, and file in this action, and upon de novo review, I conclude that the recommendation is correct. Accordingly

IT IS ORDERED as follows:

(1) Defendant Ortiz' Motion to Dismiss (Doc 37 — filed October 17, 2007) is GRANTED;

(2) Defendant Ortiz is dismissed from this civil action;

(3) Claim Two for violation of the Fourteenth Amendment is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted;

(4) Defendants Miller and Schoenmakers are dismissed from this civil action pursuant to Rule 4(m) for failure to effect service and pursuant to D.C.COLO.LR 41.1 for failure to prosecute; and

(5) Defendants John and Jane Doe are dismissed from this civil action.