From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moore v. Weeden

United States District Court, D. Rhode Island
Feb 28, 2010
C.A. No. 09-434 S (D.R.I. Feb. 28, 2010)

Opinion

C.A. No. 09-434 S.

February 28, 2010


ORDER


The Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Jacob Hagopian filed on February 3, 2010, in the above-captioned matter is hereby accepted pursuant to Title 28 United States Code § 636(b)(1). An objection to the pending Report Recommendation was received on February 23, 2010; objections were due by February 17, 2010. The Report Recommendation is hereby accepted, and defendants Roberta Richman, Tom Murphy, John Louth, Robert McCutcheon, Joseph Dinitto, Tony Amaral, Will Jackson, Morgan Stein, Officer Sayles, A.T. Wall, Nancy Bailey, James Weedon, Michael Auger, and Lieutenant Doyle are hereby DISMISSED. Further, only the First Amendment claims remain against defendants Officer Estrella, Officer Gregoire, Officer Burdick, Officer Pierce, and Officer Johansen; only the Fourteenth Amendment claims remain against defendants Officer Estrella, Officer Burdick, and Officer Pierce; and only the Eighth Amendment claims remain against defendants Officer Estrella, Officer Gregoire, Officer Burdick, and Officer Pierce. All other claims are hereby DISMISSED.


Summaries of

Moore v. Weeden

United States District Court, D. Rhode Island
Feb 28, 2010
C.A. No. 09-434 S (D.R.I. Feb. 28, 2010)
Case details for

Moore v. Weeden

Case Details

Full title:JONATHAN L. MOORE, Plaintiff, v. JAMES WEEDEN, ET AL., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, D. Rhode Island

Date published: Feb 28, 2010

Citations

C.A. No. 09-434 S (D.R.I. Feb. 28, 2010)

Citing Cases

Walker v. Wall

Here, Plaintiff has no liberty interest in avoiding 89 days of segregation, and, thus, fails to state a claim…

Knox v. Mass. Dep't of Corr.

There is also no liberty interest in a particular prison program. See Moore v. Weeden, No. 09-434 S, 2010 WL…