Smith v. United States of America et al, No. 9:2009cv00729 - Document 41 (N.D.N.Y 2011)
Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER adopting the 40 Report and Recommendations and granting in part and denying in part Defendants' 23 Motion to Dismiss. All defendants are terminated except Defendant Felner. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 3/1/2011. (amt) [Pltf served via reg. mail]
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Smith v. United States of America et al Doc. 41 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ________________________________________ BENJAMIN SMITH, Plaintiff, v. No. 9:09-CV-729 (TJM/DRH) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; DAN PETERSON, Factory Manager, FCI Ray Brook; SUSAN KEIFFER, Case Manager, FCI Ray Brook; FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIES (UNICOR), FCI Florence, Florence, Colorado; MR. FELNER, Unit Manager, FCI Ray Brook; D. KIRKBY, Factory Foreman, FCI Ray Brook; MR. LUCAS, Case Manager, FCI Ray Brook; and T.R. CRAIG, Facility Superintendent, FCI Ray Brook, Defendants. _________________________________________ THOMAS J. McAVOY, Senior United States District Judge DECISION & ORDER I. INTRODUCTION This pro se action brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), was referred to the Hon. Judge David R. Homer, United States Magistrate Judge, for a Report and Recommendation. No objections to the ReportRecommendation and Order dated February 3, 2011 have been filed, and the time to do so has expired. Furthermore, after examining the record, this Court has determined that 1 Dockets.Justia.com the Report-Recommendation and Order is not subject to attack for plain error or manifest injustice. II. CONCLUSION Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report-Recommendation and Order for the reasons stated therein. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendants motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 23) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The motion is GRANTED as to the claims for: A. Interference with mail; B. Retaliation/false disciplinary reports; C. Eighth Amendment claim of inadequate medical care; and D. Product liability/negligence under the FTCA, and these claims are DISMISSED. The motion is DENIED as to the claims for: A. A biased hearing officer; and B. Conditions of confinement. Based on this determination, all defendants are TERMINATED except Defendant Felner. IT IS SO ORDERED DATED:March 1, 2011 2
]]>
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.
