Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Rouse v. The City of Pittsburgh

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh.

May 22, 2018

AMBROSIO ROUSE, Plaintiff,
v.
THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION; ALLEGHENY COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION; HAMPTON TOWNSHIP PENNSYLVANIA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION; DEVLIN'S POINTE APARTMENTS, A BUSINESS; DEVLIN'S POINTE APARTMENTS' MANAGMENT, JAMES A. WESTJR., IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY; JUDGE SUZANNE R. BLASCHAK, IN HER OFFICIAL AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES; JUDGE ROBERT J. COLVILLE, IN HIS OFFICIAL AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES; DONALD GLOCK, IN HIS OFFICIAL AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES; HAMPTON TWP SERGEANT ROBERT KIRSOPP, IN HIS OFFICIAL AND INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES; JOHN DOE, PAUL LAST NAME UNKNOWN, ED LAST NAME UNKNOWN, BOB LAST NAME UNKNOWN, Defendants,

          MEMORANDUM ORDER

          The Honorable Arthur J. Schwab United States Senior District Judge.

         The present action was initiated in this court on November 7, 2017 by Plaintiff, proceeding pro se. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cynthia Reed Eddy for pretrial proceedings in accordance with Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rules of Court 72.C and 72.D. Pending before the Magistrate Judge were four motions to dismiss Plaintiffs complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) filed by the Defendants. See ECF Nos. 9, 15, 22, 48. The Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation filed April 27, 2018 recommended that the motions be granted. The parties were informed that in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C), and Local Rule of Court 72.D.2 that defendants had until May 11, 2018 to file objections and Plaintiff, as an unregistered ECF User, had until May 16, 2018 to file his objections.

         Defendants did not file any objections to the Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff objected to the Report and Recommendation on May 16, 2018, and his objections span fifty-six (56) single-spaced pages[1] of disjointed legal conclusions and digressions that fail to specifically address how any of the recommendations are "clearly erroneous" or "contrary to law." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). The Magistrate Judge in her Report and Recommendation meticulously navigated the labyrinth that was Plaintiffs complaint by addressing every claim that Plaintiff asserted in his complaint against each conceivable defendant.[2] Plaintiffs objections are wholly without merit.

         Accordingly, after a de novo review of the pleadings and documents in this case, together with the report and recommendation, the following Order is entered:

         AND NOW, this 22nd day of May, 2018, it is HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

         The motions at ECF Nos. 9, 15, 22, 48 are granted as follows:

         Plaintiffs complaint is dismissed with prejudice against the following individuals and the Clerk's Office is Ordered to terminate these Defendants from this case:

1. Devlin's Pointe Apartments' Management;
2. Judge Suzanne R. Blaschak;
3. Judge Robert J. Colville;
4. Constable Donald Glock;
5. Constable John Doe;

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following claims are dismissed with prejudice as to all of the Defendants because the Court lacks ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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