Garland v. Horton

Full title: KENDALL LAMAR GARLAND, Plaintiff, v. LT. HORTON, Defendant

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

Date published: Sep 8, 2006

Civil Action No. 04-130J (W.D. Pa. Sep. 8, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 04-130J.

September 8, 2006

MEMORANDUM ORDER

KIM GIBSON, District Judge

Plaintiff's Rule 60 motion, docket no. 58, was referred to Magistrate Judge Keith A. Pesto for a Report and Recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3), and Local Rule 72.1 for Magistrate Judges.

The Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation on March 31, 2006, docket no. 60, recommending that the motion be denied.

The parties were notified that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), they had ten days to serve and file written objections to the Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff filed objections, docket no. 61, which I have reviewed de novo but reject.

After de novo review of the record of this matter and the Report and Recommendation, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 8^th day of September, 2006, it is

ORDERED that the plaintiff's motion, docket no. 58, is denied and plaintiff's motion, docket No. 56 is denied. The Report and Recommendation is adopted as the opinion of the Court.