United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Magistrate Judge Mehalchick
Matthew W. Brann United States District Judge
Joseph Edward Dixon, filed a complaint on October 7, 2013,
naming as Defendants various members of the Pennsylvania
State Police, only one identified by name, Defendant Roger
Williams; the others are merely named John Does. Because he
is proceeding pro se, Plaintiff's case was
jointly assigned to Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick.
designation, a magistrate judge may "conduct hearings,
including evidentiary hearings, and . . . submit to a judge
of the court proposed findings of fact and
recommendations." Once filed, this Report and Recommendation
is disseminated to the parties in the case who then have the
opportunity to file written objections. When objections
are timely filed, the District Court must conduct a de novo
review of those portions of the report to which objections
are made. Although the standard of review for
objections is de novo, the extent of review lies within the
discretion of the district court, and the court may otherwise
rely on the recommendations of the magistrate judge to the
extent it deems proper.
and Williams filed cross motions for summary judgment. On
January 23, 2017, the magistrate judge issued a report and
recommendation recommending granting Defendant's
motion and denying Plaintiff's motion. Plaintiff
subsequently filed what I will construe as objections to the
report and recommendation.
portions of the report and recommendation to which no
objection is made, the court should, as a matter of good
practice, "satisfy itself that there is no clear error
on the face of the record in order to accept the
of whether timely objections are made by a party, the
District Court may accept, not accept, or modify, in whole or
in part, the findings or recommendations made by the
I write only for the parties, I will conserve judicial
resources and not rehash the report and recommendation. The
Plaintiff's objections are overruled, as he has provided
no persuasive argument sufficient to find that the magistrate
judge erred. The report and recommendation will be adopted in
full and the matter dismissed.
the John Doe Defendants must be dismissed. “While
fictitious defendants “are routinely used as stand-ins
for real parties until discovery permits the intended
defendants to be installed, ” our case law makes it
clear that “an action cannot proceed solely against
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
United States Magistrate Karoline Mehalchick's Report and
Recommendation is ADOPTED in full. January 23, 2017, ECF No.
Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. April
25, 2016, ECF No. 119.
Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. ...