IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
September 29, 2006
STRATTON NEAL PEAY, PLAINTIFFS,
WALTERS, C.O.; SCHAMP/PIERCE, C.O.; BILONIK, C.O.; AND KRONANDER, C.O., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan
Judge Joy Flowers Conti
Plaintiff in the above captioned action has filed a complaint which the Court believes alleges a violation of his rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Complaint, however, is completely unreadable due to illegible handwriting. This Court is unable, in viewing the document presently filed, to ascertain what Plaintiff's claims are. Plaintiff is therefore directed to file an Amended Complaint that can be read by a reasonable person. The Court understands that Plaintiff may not have access to a typewriter, which would be ideal. However, Plaintiff can reprint the complaint in a manner that is readable, which the present document is not.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff is to FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT AS SET FORTH ABOVE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT SAID AMENDED COMPLAINT IS TO BE FILED NO LATER THAN NOVEMBER 30, 2006.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A), and Local Rule 72.1.3, the parties are allowed ten (10) days from the date of service to file an appeal from this order to the District Court. Any opposing party shall have seven (7) days from the date of service of the appeal to respond thereto. Failure to timely file an appeal may constitute a waiver of any appellate rights.
Lisa Pupo Lenihan United States Magistrate Judge
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.