Opinion
File No. 19-cv-2622 (ECT/TNL)
06-19-2020
David Jannetta, Steven Hogy, Merlin Adolphson, and Kenneth Daywitt, Plaintiffs, v. Minnesota Department of Human Services; Ms. Harpestead, DHS Commissioner; Marshall Smith; Nancy Johnston; Nicole Elsen; Jim Berg; Jannine Hebert; MSOP Media Review Committee Personnel Jane Doe 1-5 John Doe 1-5; Jaime Houk, MSOP Clinical Program Manager and Media Review Committee Chairwoman; and Jessica Geil, MSOP Legal Director, in their individual and official capacities, Defendants.
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung issued a Report and Recommendation on June 1, 2020. ECF No. 29. No party has objected to that Report and Recommendation, and it is therefore reviewed for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Finding no clear error, and based upon all of the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 29] is ACCEPTED;
2. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 16] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:
a. All claims alleged by Plaintiffs against Defendant Minnesota Department of Human Services are DISMISSED without prejudice on the basis of sovereign immunity;
b. All claims for monetary relief and all claims brought under the Minnesota Constitution alleged by Plaintiffs against Defendants in their official capacities are DISMISSED without prejudice on the basis of sovereign immunity;
c. Plaintiff's claims brought under the Equal Protection Clause against Defendants in their official capacities are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
d. All claims related to the discontinuation of cable television alleged by Plaintiffs against Defendants in their official capacities are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
e. All claims alleged by Plaintiffs against Defendants in their individual capacities are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
f. Defendants' motion to dismiss is DENIED with respect to the First and Fourth Amendment claims for prospective injunctive relief alleged by Plaintiffs against Defendants in their official capacities insofar as those claims relate to Minnesota Sex Offender Program Policy 420-5230; and
3. Plaintiffs' Motion in Opposition [ECF No. 24] is DENIED AS MOOT. Dated: June 19, 2020
s/ Eric C. Tostrud
Eric C. Tostrud
United States District Court