Pasaye v. State of Nevada, ex rel et al, No. 2:2017cv02574 - Document 64 (D. Nev. 2020)

Court Description: ORDER granting 50 Defendants motion to dismiss. The plaintiff's federal claims are dismissed with prejudice, and his state-law claims are dismissed without prejudice to his ability to file a new action alleging these state-law claims in stat e court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the plaintiff's 58 motion to amend is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the plaintiff's 59 motion for reconsideration is DENIED. The plaintiffs 62 motion for excusable neglect is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to ENTER FINAL JUDGMENT for the defendant and CLOSE THIS CASE. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 5/1/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRS)

Download PDF
Dockets.Justia.com UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA Order (1) Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, (2) Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Excusable Neglect, and (3) Denying Plaintiff’s Motions to Amend and to Reconsider Pasaye v. State of Nevada, ex rel et al Doc. 64 Background 7 et seq Id Id. Compare id Discussion I. Motion for Excusable Neglect [ECF No. 62] Id. Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P’ship Costco Wholesale Corp. Stiller v. II. Motion for Reconsideration [ECF No. 59] see also See Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cnty. v. ACandS, Inc. Id See Brown v. Kinross Gold, U.S.A. III. The defendants’ motion to dismiss [ECF No. 50] A. Motion-to-dismiss standard see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal Id. Id. Id. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly B. Section 1983 standard C. All of Pasaye’s claims for money damages against the defendants in their official capacities fail. Baker v. McCollan West v. Atkins Perez-Morciglio v. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep’t West v. Atkins Id D. Pasaye can’t recover money damages from the State of Nevada or NDOC for his RLUIPA claim. Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police Id Id Beers v. Arkansas Id Sossamon v. Texas E. The individual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on Pasaye’s federal claims. Sossamon v. Texas Id Id Ashcroft v. al-Kidd Id Pearson v. Callahan Quiroz v. Short v. Bieter Community House, Inc. particular Morrison v. Garraghty solely Carroll v. Carman Id Mullenix v. Luna Id Id Morrison v. Garraghty Ashcroft Mitchell v. Angelone Brown ex rel. Indigenous Inmates at N.D. State Prison v. Schuetzle Mauwee v. Donat Id Mitchell v. Angelone Brown ex rel. Indigenous Inmates at N.D. State Prison v. Schuetzle Mauwee v. Donat aff’d Id F. Even if the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity on Pasaye’s equalprotection claim, the claim fails for lack of personal participation. Ashcroft Hafer v. Melo Id Id G. Pasaye’s prayer for declaratory relief under RLUIPA is moot. of sufficient immediacy and reality to warrant the issuance of a declaratory judgment Feldman v. Bomar Preiser v. Newkirk Preiser Id McQuillion v. Schwarzenegger Feldman H. I decline supplemental jurisdiction over Pasaye’s state-law claims. See United Mine Workers of Am. v. Gibbs IV. Motion to Amend [ECF No. 58] see also Id Id Id. Steckman v. Hart Brewing, Inc. Sossamon v. Texas Sossamon Cato v. U.S. Sossamon see also id. See Anselmo v. Cty. of Shasta, Cal. Jackson v. Sullivan Gray v. Lewis Mauwee Conclusion IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED [ECF No. 50] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED [ECF No. 58] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED [ECF No. 59] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED [ECF No. 62] is GRANTED. ENTER FINAL JUDGMENT CLOSE THIS CASE

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.