Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

16-8272 - Rodrigues v. Ryan et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
16-8272 - Rodrigues v. Ryan et al
May 16, 2017
PDF | More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending that the Court dismiss without prejudice Count One of the First Amended Complaint. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Court order Defendants Ryan, Rider, Santiago, Diaz, Winkler, and Frederick to answer the Eighth Amendment threat-to-safety claim contained in Count Two of the First Amended Complaint; that the Court order Defendants MTC, Washington, Rider, Santiago, Diaz, Winkler, and Frederick to answer the Arizona common law claim for negligence in Count Three; that the Court order Defendant MTC to answer the negligent training claim in Count Three; that the Court dismiss without prejudice Counts Four, Five, and Six of the First Amended Complaint. See attached Report for details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eileen S Willett on 05/16/2017. (KAS)
June 9, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER (Service Packet): The R&R 22 is accepted. Count One of the First Amended Complaint be dismissed without prejudice. Defendants Ryan, Rider, Santiago, Diaz, Winkler, and Frederick shall answer the Eighth Amendment threat-to-safety claim contained in Count Two of the First Amended Complaint. Defendants MTC, Washington, Rider, Santiago, Diaz, Winkler, and Frederick shall answer the Arizona common law claim for negligence in Count Three. Defendant MTC shall answer the negligent training claim in Count Three. Counts Four, Five, and Six of the First Amended Complaint are dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court shall send Plaintiff a service packet including the First Amended Complaint, this Order, and a copy of the Marshals Process Receipt & Return form (USM-285) and Notice of Lawsuit & Request for Waiver of Service of Summons form for Defendants MTC, Washington and Frederick. Plaintiff shall complete and return the service packet to the Clerk of Court within 21 days of the date of filing of this Order. The United States Marshal will not provide service of process if Plaintiff fails to comply with this Order. A certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are denied. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 6/09/2017. (REK)
November 3, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER - The reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn as to Plaintiff's 58 Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order. Plaintiff's 58 Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order is denied. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 11/3/2017. (ATD)
December 6, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER - The reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn as to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 24). Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 24) is granted in part and denied in part. The Motion is granted as to Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment official capacity claims against Ryan and Diaz and Plaintiff's negligence claim against Diaz in Count Three. The Motion is denied in all other respects. (See document for further details). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 12/6/17. (SLQ)
January 10, 2018
PDF | More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, recommending that the Court dismiss without prejudice Count one of the 99 Second Amended Complaint. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Court order Defendants Doe, Santiago, Rider, Winkler, Frederick, Ryan (in his individual capacity only), and Diaz (in his individual capacity only) to answer the Eighth Amendment threat-to-safety claim contained in Count Two of the Second Amended Complaint. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the Court order Defendants MTC, Washington, Rider, Santiago, Winkler, and Frederick to answer the Arizona common law claim for negligence in Count Three of the Second Amended Complaint; that the Court order Defendant MTC to answer the negligent training claim in Count Three of the Second Amended Complaint; that the Court dismiss Count Four of the Second Amended Complaint as to all Defendants except Defendant Doe; that the Court dismiss without prejudice Counts Five and Six of the Second Amended Complaint. See document for complete details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eileen S Willett on 1/9/2018. (ATD)
March 1, 2018
PDF | More
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff's "Notice and Motion to Compel Answer to First Amended Complaint" (Doc. 101). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Plaintiff's "Motion to Stay Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and Request for Court Order" (Doc. 104). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Plaintiff's Motion to Compel (Docs. 89, 120). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED referring to the District Judge Plaintiff's renewed request for a temporary restraining order that is set forth in Plaintiff's "Notice and Motion to Compel Production and Renewed Request for Order of Protection" (Doc. 89). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Defendants' "Motion to Quash Plaintiff's Subpoenas" (Doc. 94). The subpoenas duces tecum purportedly served on non-parties CO III McNamer, ADOC Division Director Joe Profiri, ADOC Deputy Director Jeff Hood, ADOC Inspector General Greg Lauchner, and Governor Doug Ducey are quashed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Defendants' "Motion to Quash Plaintiff's Subpoenas" (Doc. 108). The subpoenas duces tecum purportedly served on non-parties Mohave County Attorney Matt Smith and ADOC "Grievance Appeals Administrator" are quashed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Plaintiff's "Motion for Extention [sic] of Time" (Doc. 124). Plaintiff's Response (Doc. 127) filed on February 22, 2018 is deemed timely. (See document for further details). Signed by Magistrate Judge Eileen S Willett on 2/28/18. (LAD)
July 6, 2018
PDF | More
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED: (1) The reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn as to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 91). (2) Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies (Doc. 91) is denied. (3) Summary judgment is granted in favor of Plaintiff as to exhaustion of administrative remedies. (4) The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Willett (Doc. 103) is accepted and adopted in part as follows: (a) Counts Four, Five and Six of the Second Amended Complaint (SAC) are dismissed without prejudice; (b) Defendant John/Jane Doe must answer Count One of the SAC; (c) Defendants John/Jane Doe, Santiago, Rider, Winkler, Frederick, Ryan (in his individual capacity only), and Diaz (in his individual capacity only) must answer Count Two of the SAC; (d) Defendants MTC, Washington, Rider, Santiago, Winkler, and Frederick answer the Arizona common law negligence claim in Count Three of the SAC; (e) Defendant MTC must answer the negligent training claim in Count Three of the SAC. (5) Within sixty (60) days of the date of this Order, Plaintiff must file a "Notice of Substitution" substituting the actual name(s) of the "Doe" Defendants in Counts One and Two. Unless Plaintiff seeks and is granted an extension of time, the failure to timely file a notice of substitution will result in the dismissal of the Doe Defendants without prejudice. (6) The Court's stay of discovery pending resolution of the exhaustion issue (Doc. 109) is lifted. A Scheduling Order will be issued by the Magistrate Judge as a separate order. (7) All other matters must remain with the Magistrate Judge for disposition as appropriate. (See document for complete details). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 7/6/18. (SLQ)