From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davila-Bajana v. Holohan

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Sep 24, 2007
Civil Action No. 04-253 Erie (W.D. Pa. Sep. 24, 2007)

Summary

assuming that an inmate-plaintiff's verbal complaints were constitutionally protected activity

Summary of this case from McClenton v. Doe

Opinion

Civil Action No. 04-253 Erie.

September 24, 2007


MEMORANDUM ORDER


This civil rights action was received by the Clerk of Court on September 7, 2004, 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 Amended Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 90], filed on August 28, 2007, recommended that Defendants' motion to dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment [Doc. No. 63] be granted and that Plaintiff's proposed amended complaint [Doc. No. 86] be dismissed as futile. The parties were allowed ten (10) days from the date of service to file objections. Service was made on Plaintiff by certified mail and on Defendants. Plaintiff was granted an extension until September 21, 2007 to file objections [Doc. No. 91]. No objections were filed. After de novo review of the motion and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 24th day of September, 2007;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendants' motion to dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment [Doc. No. 63] is GRANTED and Plaintiff's proposed amended complaint [Doc. No. 86] is DISMISSED as futile.

The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 90] of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed on August 28, 2007, is adopted as the opinion of the Court.


Summaries of

Davila-Bajana v. Holohan

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Sep 24, 2007
Civil Action No. 04-253 Erie (W.D. Pa. Sep. 24, 2007)

assuming that an inmate-plaintiff's verbal complaints were constitutionally protected activity

Summary of this case from McClenton v. Doe

assuming that an inmate-plaintiff's verbal complaints were constitutionally protected activity

Summary of this case from Sears v. Mooney
Case details for

Davila-Bajana v. Holohan

Case Details

Full title:JUAN DAVILA-BAJANA, Plaintiff, v. TIM HOLOHAN, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Sep 24, 2007

Citations

Civil Action No. 04-253 Erie (W.D. Pa. Sep. 24, 2007)

Citing Cases

Shegog v. Grinell

The Court will assume, without deciding, that Shegog's speaking with others about negative comments in…

Sears v. Mooney

Plaintiff's verbal complaints constitute protected activity, as well. See Brewer v. Kamas, 533 F. Supp. 2d…