Cole v. Sobina

Full title: JAMES COLE, Plaintiff, v. RAYMOND SOBINA, Superintendent of SCI Somerset…

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

Date published: Dec 19, 2007

Civil Action No. 04-99J (W.D. Pa. Dec. 19, 2007)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 04-99J.

December 19, 2007

MEMORANDUM ORDER

KIM GIBSON, District Judge

The above captioned case was initiated by the filing of a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (doc. no. 1) on May 6, 2004. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Lisa Pupo Lenihan for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrate Judges.

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (doc. no. 33), filed on November 14, 2007, recommended that the Partial Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint (doc. no. 23) be granted with respect to Plaintiff's ADA and RA claims against Defendants in their individual capacities and as to Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Sobina and that it be denied as to Defendants' assertion that Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Hunter and Walker are barred by the two-year limitations period. It further recommended that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Mailman and Westley (doc. no. 26) be denied. The Report and Recommendation was served on the Plaintiff at the address presently listed on the docket sheet. The parties were advised they were allowed ten (10) days from the date of service to file written objections to the report and recommendation. No objections have been 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 19^th day of December, 2007;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Partial Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint (doc. no. 23) is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff's ADA and RA claims against Defendants in their individual capacities, as to Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Sobina and DENIED as to Defendants' assertion that Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Hunter and Walker are barred by the two-year limitations period.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Mailman and Westley (doc. no. 26) be DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (doc. no. 33) of Magistrate Judge Lenihan, dated November 14, 2007, is adopted as the Opinion of the Court.