From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

(Ford) v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

United States District Court, D. Colorado
May 24, 2011
Civil Action No. 08-cv-00882-LTB-BNB (D. Colo. May. 24, 2011)

Summary

concluding that plaintiff failed to "establish a prima facie case regarding whether he has sincere religious beliefs based on the How to Eat to Live books" when unrefuted evidence demonstrated personal practices that vary from its tenets

Summary of this case from Al-Azim v. Everett

Opinion

Civil Action No. 08-cv-00882-LTB-BNB.

May 24, 2011


ORDER


This matter arises on Defendants' Motion to Strike Docket Number 117 [Doc. #118, filed 04/13/2011] (the "Motion"). The defendants seek an order striking the plaintiff's traverse [Doc. #117] to their motion to dismiss [Doc. #101]. Separately, I have recommended that the motion to dismiss be denied as moot. Therefore, the plaintiff's traverse and this motion are moot. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion [Doc./# 118] is DENIED AS MOOT.


Summaries of

(Ford) v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

United States District Court, D. Colorado
May 24, 2011
Civil Action No. 08-cv-00882-LTB-BNB (D. Colo. May. 24, 2011)

concluding that plaintiff failed to "establish a prima facie case regarding whether he has sincere religious beliefs based on the How to Eat to Live books" when unrefuted evidence demonstrated personal practices that vary from its tenets

Summary of this case from Al-Azim v. Everett

granting summary judgment to defendants on similar NOI diet accommodation claim because "defendants have demonstrated with unrefuted evidence . . . that the plaintiff does not comply with all of the dietary practices which he claims are essential to his faith"

Summary of this case from Tatum v. Meisner
Case details for

(Ford) v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

Case Details

Full title:BRO. EDWARD J.X. (FORD), JR., Plaintiff, v. THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS…

Court:United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: May 24, 2011

Citations

Civil Action No. 08-cv-00882-LTB-BNB (D. Colo. May. 24, 2011)

Citing Cases

Tatum v. Meisner

See also Nelson v. Miller, 570 F.3d 868, 878-79 (7th Cir. 2009) (holding that religious exercise inquiry…

Gonzalez v. Joey

The required preliminary showing under RLUIPA is identical to that of the free exercise clause: that the…