Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Carter v. Harper

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

June 2, 2015

DEERING CARTER, Plaintiff,
v.
HARPER, WARDEN; SGT. REUBEL; JOHN SMITH, and OFFICER ZOLLER, Defendants.

MEMORANDUM ORDER

TERRENCE F. McVERRY, Senior District Judge.

This case was commenced on September 15, 2014, and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cynthia Reed Eddy for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1), and the Local Rules of Court for Magistrate Judges.

Defendants each filed a motion to dismiss (ECF Nos. 8 and 19) arguing that the Complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff did not respond to the motions. In the absence of any timely response by Plaintiff, the magistrate judge deemed the motions to dismiss to be ripe for disposition and analyzed the Complaint on the merits. Ray v. Reed, 240 F.Appx. 455, 456 (3d Cir. 2007).

On May 13, 2015, Magistrate Judge Eddy filed a Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 28) recommending that the motions to dismiss be granted. The Report and Recommendation was mailed to Plaintiff at his listed address of record, but was returned to the Court marked "return to sender, vacant, unable to forward." (ECF No. 29.)[1] Plaintiff has not provided the Court with a forwarding address and the Court has been unable to find a forwarding address for Plaintiff.

If and when Plaintiff provides a new address, the Court will send him a copy of the Report and Recommendation, as well as this Memorandum Order. Furthermore, in an abundance of caution, the Court will send this Order to Plaintiff at the only address he has provided the Court.

The Court has reviewed the matter and concludes that the Report and Recommendation correctly analyzes the issues and makes a sound recommendation. Accordingly, after de novo review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 2nd day of June, 2015:

1. The Motions to Dismiss filed by Defendant John Smith and the County Defendants (ECF Nos. 8 and 19, respectively) are GRANTED; and

2. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 28) dated May 13, 2015, is ADOPTED as the Opinion of the Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mark this case CLOSED.

AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Plaintiff has thirty (30) days to file a notice of appeal as provided by Rule 3 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.