IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
September 12, 2012
MIDDLETOWN BOROUGH POLICE DEPARTMENT, ET AL.., DEFENDANTS
The opinion of the court was delivered by: (Judge Conner)
AND NOW, this 12th day of September, 2012, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson (Doc. 5), recommending that Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1) against District Judge Judy be dismissed without prejudice, and, following an independent review of the record, it appearing that neither party has objected to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, and that there is no clear error on the face of the record,*fn1 see Nara v. Frank, 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007) (explaining that "failing to timely object to [a report and recommendation] in a civil proceeding may result in forfeiture of de novo review at the district court level"), and the court noting that plaintiff filed an amended complaint on June 15, 2012 (Doc. 8), which does not address the deficiencies set forth in Judge Carlson's Report and Recommendation, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The amended complaint (Doc. 8) is hereby STRICKEN from the record.
2. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Carlson (Doc. 5) are ADOPTED.
3. Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1) against Defendant District Judge Judy is DISMISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint within twenty (20) days addressing the specific deficiencies noted in Judge Carlson's Report and Recommendation. Failure to file an amended complaint in a timely fashion shall be deemed an abandonment of claims against Defendant Judy and the case shall proceed against the remaining defendants.
4. The above-captioned case is REMANDED to Magistrate Judge Carlson for further proceedings.
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER United States District Judge