United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
November 28, 2005.
AKEEM MUTOMBO, Plaintiff
MARTY WILLIAMS, SUPT. KLEM, OFFICER HUGHES, and OFFICER WILLIAMS Defendants.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: YVETTE KANE, District Judge
Before this Court is Judge Smyser's Report and Recommendation
(Doc. No. 34); Plaintiff's Objections thereto (Doc. Nos. 35, 37,
and 38);*fn1 and Defendants' Briefs in Opposition (Doc. Nos.
36 and 39). Upon an independent de novo review of the entire
record and the applicable law, the Court accepts the reasoning
stated in Magistrate Judge Smyser's Report and Recommendation
filed July 14, 2005.
The Court notes that the discovery deadline set for this matter
has not yet expired.*fn2 Although in certain circumstances
the incomplete state of discovery by itself warrants preclusion
of summary judgment, Miller v. Beneficial Mgmt. Corp.,
977 F.2d 834, 846 (3d Cir. 1992) (citation omitted), Plaintiff fails to
identify "what particular information is sought; how, if
uncovered, it would preclude summary judgment;  why it has not
previously been obtained," and presents no scenario by which he
would expect to have evidence of retaliation before the
expiration of the discovery deadline. Pastore v. Bell Tel. Co.,
24 F.3d 508, 511 (3d Cir. 1994). Moreover, Plaintiff fails to put forth any evidence of
retaliation, so as to raise a genuine issue of material fact.
Instead, Plaintiff merely makes bald assertions of conspiracy
involving prison and court officials. Most notably, Plaintiff
asserts: that his past civil actions were purposely and willfully
dismissed out of hand due to "nepotism, racial animus, and . . .
the nepotism nexus;" that the undersigned is related to Hearing
Examiner Kane and is therefore biased against him; that "America
is a bankrupt nation, not operating under Constitutional law, but
under certain `public bankruptcy policies;'" that Plaintiff fears
for his life because of "paid informants that have been equipped
with poison;" and that Plaintiff's prior civil actions were each
"dismissed by Klan members that are in this jurisdiction." (Doc.
Nos. 35, 37). These allegations do not go to his claims of
retaliation and are not supported by the record.
Accordingly, this 28th day of November 2005, IT IS HEREBY
1. The Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation
of Magistrate Judge Smyser (Doc. No. 34).
2. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No.
22) is GRANTED.
3. Plaintiff's objections (Doc. Nos. 35, 37, and 38)
4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the file.
© 1992-2005 VersusLaw Inc.