Opinion
CASE NO: 1:10-cv-63 (WLS).
March 16, 2011
ORDER
Before the Court is a Report and Recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge Thomas Q. Langstaff, filed February 23, 2011. (Doc. 36). It is recommended that Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 16) be denied based on Defendants' timely response to and defense of Plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action and that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 28) be granted under the Prison Litigation Reform Act "three strikes" provision. (Doc. 36 at 2, 4-6).
The Report and Recommendation provided the Parties with fourteen (14) days from the date of its service to file written objections to the recommendations therein. ( Id. at 3). The period for filing objections expired on Monday, March 14, 2011; no objections have been filed to date. ( See Docket).
The Parties were given an additional three days because service was made by mail. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(d) (adding three days to specified period within which a party may act if service is made under Rule 5(b)(2)(C) by mailing process to a party's last known address).
Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a)(1)(C), because the actual deadline for filing objections — Saturday, March 12, 2011 — fell on a weekend, the deadline was extended to Monday, March 14, 2011. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a)(1)(C).
In view of the absence of any objections from the record of this case and the Court's consideration of the record as a whole, United States Magistrate Judge Langstaff's February 23, 2011 Report and Recommendation (Doc. 36) is ACCEPTED, ADOPTED and made the Order of this Court for reason of the findings made and reasons stated therein. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 16) is DENIED, Defendants' Motions to Dismiss (Doc. 28) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's § 1983 Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff may re-file this case but only if he pays the required filing fees to commence the lawsuit.