Berryman v. Mullen et al, No. 1:2016cv00047 - Document 71 (N.D.W. Va. 2017)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION DKT. NO. 60 AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART THE DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DKT. NO. 51 , AND ROSEBORO NOTICE REGARDING MOTION T O DISMISS DKT. NO. 69 : The Court ADOPTS the R&R (Dkt. No. 60 ); DENIES in part the defendants Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment as to Berrymans failure to protect claims against Lt. Riffle, Officer Brady, Officer Brow n, and Officer Mullen (Dkt. No. [51)]; GRANTS in part the defendants Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment as to Berrymans due process claim against Officer Brown, Officer Brady, and Lt. Riffle; his claim that PA Meyer was de liberately indifferent to his medical needs; and all of his claims against John Doe I, John Doe II, and the Four Unknown BOP Officers; and GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Berrymans Motion to Dismiss or Stay the Defendants Motion to Dismiss or for S ummary Judgment (Dkt. No. 56 ). The Court DIRECTS Berryman to file any opposition to the defendants 69 motion within 21 days of the entry of this Order, explaining why his case should not be dismissed. Berrymans responsemay not exceed 25 pages. Signed by District Judge Irene M. Keeley on 8/17/17. (Attachments: # 1 Certified Mail Return Receipt)(jss)