Baxter v. Gander Mountain Corp.

Full title: CHARLES W. BAXTER, Plaintiff, v. GANDER MOUNTAIN CORP., et al, Defendants

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

Date published: Nov 29, 2006

C.A. No. 05-295 Erie (W.D. Pa. Nov. 29, 2006)

Opinion

C.A. No. 05-295 Erie.

November 29, 2006

MEMORANDUM ORDER

MAURICE COHILL JR., District Judge

Plaintiff's complaint was received by the Clerk of Court on October 12, 2005, and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter for report and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates.

The magistrate judge's report and recommendation, filed on October 25, 2006, recommended that the motion to dismiss filed by Defendants Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania State Police Central Repository [Document # 19] be granted; the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Millcreek Police [Document # 21] be granted; the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Gander Mountain Corporation [Document # 25] be granted; and the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Erie County Courthouse [Document # 34] be granted. The parties were allowed ten (10) days from the date of service to file objections. Service was made on Plaintiff by certified mail at 625 East 8^th Street, Erie, PA 16503, the last address of record, and on Defendants. No objections were filed. 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 29th Day of November, 2006;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to dismiss filed by Defendants Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania State Police Central Repository [Document # 19] is GRANTED; the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Millcreek Police [Document # 21] is GRANTED; the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Gander Mountain Corporation [Document # 25] is GRANTED; and the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Erie County Courthouse [Document # 34] is GRANTED. As this Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state law claims raised within the complaints, this action is DISMISSED in its entirety.

The report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter, dated October 25, 2006, is adopted as the opinion of the court.