United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
September 27, 2005.
KEITH BARTELLI, Plaintiff,
C/O NAGY and DONALD JONES, Defendants.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: EDWIN KOSIK, Senior District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
AND NOW, THIS 27th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2005, IT APPEARING TO
THE COURT THAT:
 On April 26, 2004, plaintiff filed the above-captioned
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983;
 the matter was assigned to United States Magistrate Judge
Thomas M. Blewitt;
 Bartelli's complaint concerns the defendants' actions while
the plaintiff was incarcerated at the State Correctional
Institution at Dallas (SCI Dallas), Pennsylvania;
 Bartelli alleges that defendant Nagy filed a false
misconduct report against the plaintiff on April 24, 2001, after
the plaintiff had filed a grievance against Nagy;
 Bartelli further alleges that Hearing Examiner Donald Jones
denied the his requests to call witnesses at a disciplinary
hearing held on April 26, 2001;*fn1  on October 29, 2004 this court declined to adopt a Report
and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that suggested that we
dismiss Bartelli's complaint as time-barred and because the
plaintiff failed to assert a cognizable claim of retaliation
against the defendants;
 the defendants filed a motion for summary judgment or for
judgment on the pleadings on May 25, 2005;
 both parties briefed the motion for summary judgment;
 Magistrate Judge Blewitt issued a Report and Recommendation
on September 6, 2005, suggesting that we grant the defendant's
motion and dismiss both of Bartelli's claims;
 neither the plaintiff, nor the defendant filed objections
to the Report and Recommendation.
IT FURTHER APPEARING THAT:
 If no objections are filed to a Magistrate Judge's Report
and Recommendation, the Court need not conduct a de novo review
of the plaintiff's claims. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Thomas v.
Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150-53, 106 S.Ct. 466 (1985). Nonetheless,
the usual practice of the district court is to give "reasoned
consideration" to a magistrate judge's report prior to adopting
it. Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3rd Cir.
1987);  having examined the Magistrate Judge's Report and
Recommendation, we agree with his recommendation to grant the
defendants' motion for summary judgment or motion for judgment on
 we concur with the Magistrate Judge's analysis of the
issues raised in the defendants' motion and find the Magistrate
Judge's review of the record to be comprehensive;
 specifically, we agree with the Magistrate Judge's
conclusion that summary judgment be granted in favor of the
defendants as they have demonstrated that both of the claims
contained in Bartelli's complaint are time-barred by the
applicable statute of limitations, and that the plaintiff failed
to exhaust the available administrative remedies prior to
initiating the present suit.
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
 the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Thomas M.
Blewitt dated September 6, 2005 (Doc. 71) is adopted;
 the defendants' motion for summary judgment or judgment on
the pleadings is granted as to all claims of the plaintiff's
 judgment is entered in favor of defendants, C/O Nagy and
Donald Jones, and against the plaintiff, Keith Bartelli, on all
 the Clerk of Court is directed to close this case, and
forward a copy of this Memorandum and Order to the Magistrate
© 1992-2005 VersusLaw Inc.