Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-00314/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-00314-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Erik Scott Maloney, )

)

Plaintiff, ) No. CV 13-00314-PHX-RCB(BSB)

)

vs. ) O R D E R

)

Charles L. Ryan, et al. )

)

Defendants. ) )

Familiarity with the prior proceedings herein is

presumed. Since the issuance of this court’s June 28, 2013

order (Doc. 13), on July 9, 2013, executed waivers of service

as to the original complaint were filed on behalf of

defendants Ryan and Linderman (Docs. 14 and 15), Evidently

the only other remaining defendant, Wayne Mason, has yet to

be served. In any event, the next day, on July 10, 2013,

plaintiff pro se Erik Scott Maloney filed a second amended

complaint (“SAC”) (Doc. 17). The first three counts in the

SAC, all pertaining to Ramadan, which this year began on July

9th and will end on approximately August 7th, are virtually

Case 2:13-cv-00314-JJT-JZB Document 19 Filed 07/16/13 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

identical to the first three counts in his original

complaint. The only differences are that in accordance with

this court’s screening order (Doc. 5), Lance Hemter and

Stephen Morris are no longer named as defendants. Likewise,

the SAC omits all allegations pertaining to them. 

Unlike the original complaint, however, the SAC includes

a fourth count, which was the sole basis for plaintiff’s

first amended complaint. That fourth count alleges a

violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized

Persons Act (“RLUIPA”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1(a), against

defendant Ryan. The plaintiff alleges that defendant Ryan

violated RLUIPA by rescinding an Arizona Department of

Corrections policy regarding inmates’ possession of religious

books, “substantially burdening” the “religious exercise of

Dawwah[,]” which is “require[d] [of] [M]uslim

practitioner[s][.]” SAC (Doc. 17) at 13 and 14. 

The SAC has yet to be served. Obviously, this fourth

count is separate and distinct from the three Ramadan counts,

which were the subject of this court’s prior screening order,

and of which defendants Ryan and Linderman are fully aware,

given that they have both been served with the original

complaint.

Simultaneously with the filing of the SAC, the plaintiff

filed a renewed “Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order

and/or Preliminary Injunction[.]” Mot. (Doc. 16) at 1:12-13. 

That motion pertains solely to the Ramadan counts (I-III). 

Because currently Ramadan is ongoing, the court hereby

orders:

Case 2:13-cv-00314-JJT-JZB Document 19 Filed 07/16/13 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1 The plaintiff is advised that particularly in light of the “newly

developed facts” as outlined in his renewed motion and the accompanying

exhibits, at least insofar as the court is concerned, a reply is not

essential. See Maloney Decl’n (Doc. 16) at 3, ¶ 2. 

- 3 -

(1) the defendants to file and serve a response to

plaintiff’s renewed motion (Doc. 16) by no later than Monday,

July 22, 2013, at noon;

(2) if plaintiff decides to file and serve a reply,1 he

shall do so by no later than Monday, July 29, 2013; and 

(3) plaintiff’s motion shall be resolved on the written

submissions before the court; no evidentiary hearing will be

conducted. 

DATED this 16th day of July, 2013.

Copies to counsel of record and plaintiff pro se

Case 2:13-cv-00314-JJT-JZB Document 19 Filed 07/16/13 Page 3 of 3