From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Douglas v. Hilligoss

United States District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
Mar 29, 2010
NO. CIV-09-0792-HE (W.D. Okla. Mar. 29, 2010)

Opinion

NO. CIV-09-0792-HE.

March 29, 2010


ORDER


Plaintiff Kenneth Douglas filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging a deprivation of due process and conspiracy. Consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), the matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Robert E. Bacharach, who has recommended that a motion to dismiss filed by the defendants be granted and the action be dismissed with prejudice. The magistrate judge found that the petitioner's due process claim failed because he had not pleaded the deprivation of a liberty interest. He concluded the petitioner's conspiracy claim failed because it was based on the asserted due process violation.

The magistrate judge found the petitioner lacked a liberty interest in his classification level in Oklahoma's prison classification system

The plaintiff failed to object to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation and thereby waived his right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues it addressed. United States v. One Parcel of Real Property, 73 F.3d 1057, 1059-60 (10th Cir. 1996). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Accordingly, the court adopts Magistrate Judge Bacharach's Report and Recommendation, grants respondents' motion to dismiss and dismiss petitioner's claims with prejudice.

The reference to the conspiracy claim being dismissed "without" prejudice on page 6 of the Report and Recommendation is obviously a typographical error.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Douglas v. Hilligoss

United States District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
Mar 29, 2010
NO. CIV-09-0792-HE (W.D. Okla. Mar. 29, 2010)
Case details for

Douglas v. Hilligoss

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH DOUGLAS, Plaintiff, v. JOHN HILLIGOSS, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Oklahoma

Date published: Mar 29, 2010

Citations

NO. CIV-09-0792-HE (W.D. Okla. Mar. 29, 2010)

Citing Cases

Sundance Servs., Inc. v. Roach

Because the Court has determined that Sundance has not stated plausible RICO predicate acts, it is…

Sundance Services, Inc. v. Roach

Finally, the Court determines that the Third Cause of Action should be dismissed without prejudice because…