Doss v. Bureau of Prisons

Full title: DARNELL DOSS, Plaintiff, v. BUREAU OF PRISONS, et al., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania

Date published: Sep 21, 2023

CIVIL 4:19-cv-1789 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 21, 2023)

Opinion

CIVIL 4:19-cv-1789

09-21-2023

DARNELL DOSS, Plaintiff, v. BUREAU OF PRISONS, et al., Defendants.

SYLVIA H. RAMBO, United States District Judge

ORDER

SYLVIA H. RAMBO, United States District Judge

AND NOW, this 21^st day of September, 2023, upon consideration of Defendants' second motion seeking dismissal of Plaintiff Darnell Doss's complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) or summary judgment under Rule 56, and Magistrate Judge Arbuckle's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 75) recommending that the motion be granted, and noting that Plaintiff has not filed objections to the report and recommendation and the time for doing so has passed, and the court having satisfied itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record, Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see also Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Intern., Inc., 702 F.Supp.2d 465, 469 (M.D. Pa. 2010) (explaining that judges should review dispositive legal issues raised by the report for clear error), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 75) is ADOPTED;

2) Defendants' motion (Doc. 58) requesting dismissal and/or summary judgment as to all remaining claims is GRANTED;

3) The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close this case; and

4) The court declines to issue a certificate of appealability, as Brown has failed to demonstrate a “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); see also Buck v. Davis, 137 S.Ct. 759, 773-75 (2017); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335-36 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).