From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arnold v. Gilmore

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 24, 2017
Civil Action No. 2: 16-cv-1299 (W.D. Pa. Jul. 24, 2017)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 2: 16-cv-1299

07-24-2017

KENNETH ARNOLD, Plaintiff, v. SUPERINTENDENT R. GILMORE, et al., Defendants.

cc: KENNETH ARNOLD GN-7646 SCI Forest Post Office Box 945 Marienville, PA 16239 (via U.S. First Class Mail) John P. Senich, Jr. Office of Attorney General (via ECF electronic notification)


MEMORANDUM ORDER

Plaintiff, Kenneth Arnold, commenced this case on August 26, 2016, with the filing of a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis with attached Civil Rights Complaint. (ECF No. 1.) The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cynthia Reed Eddy for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and the Local Rules of Court for Magistrate Judges. On December 27, 2016, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 25.) In response, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint on January 20, 2017. (ECF No. 29.)

On February 7, 2017, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint (ECF No. 32). Plaintiff responded in opposition to the motion. (ECF No. 38, ECF No. 39).

On June 23, 2017 Magistrate Judge Eddy filed a Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 44) recommending that the motion be granted as to Plaintiff's due process claims, but denied as to Plaintiff's failure to protect claims. The parties were served with the Report and Recommendation at their listed addresses of record and advised that any written objections by Plaintiff were due by July 13, 2017, and any written objections by Defendants were due by July 10, 2017. To date, no party has filed any objections and no party has sought an extension of time in which to do so.

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 24th day of July, 2017:

1. The Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint filed by Defendants (ECF No. 32) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: The motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's due process claims which are hereby dismissed with prejudice. Defendants CO 1 M.R. Johnson, Hearing Examiner L.S. Kerns Barr, and Tracy Shawley, Grievance Coordinator, are dismissed with prejudice.

The motion is DENIED as to Plaintiff's failure to protect claims. This claim proceeds against Superintendent R. Gilmore, Lt. E. Grego, and CO 1 Gray.

3. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 44) dated June 23, 2017, is ADOPTED as the Opinion of the Court.

4. Defendants shall file their Answers in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(4)(A).

5. The matter is referred back to Magistrate Judge Eddy for all future pretrial matters.

BY THE COURT:

s/Nora Barry Fischer

Nora Barry Fischer

United States District Judge cc: KENNETH ARNOLD

GN-7646

SCI Forest

Post Office Box 945

Marienville, PA 16239

(via U.S. First Class Mail)

John P. Senich, Jr.

Office of Attorney General

(via ECF electronic notification)


Summaries of

Arnold v. Gilmore

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 24, 2017
Civil Action No. 2: 16-cv-1299 (W.D. Pa. Jul. 24, 2017)
Case details for

Arnold v. Gilmore

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH ARNOLD, Plaintiff, v. SUPERINTENDENT R. GILMORE, et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Jul 24, 2017

Citations

Civil Action No. 2: 16-cv-1299 (W.D. Pa. Jul. 24, 2017)