From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. McClenahan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Mar 15, 2021
2:20-CV-00008-DSC (W.D. Pa. Mar. 15, 2021)

Opinion

2:20-CV-00008-DSC

03-15-2021

WILLIAM HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. MCCLENAHAN, SERGEANT; HINSON, CORRECTIONS OFFICER; MARK CAPOZZA, SUPERINTENDENT; JOSEPH TREMPUS, MAJOR; FRANK SALVAY, SECURITY CAPTAIN; AND S. HENRY, LIEUTENANT, Defendants.


MAGISTRATE JUDGE LISA P. LENIHAN ECF NO. 31 MEMORANDUM ORDER

Plaintiff initiated this pro se civil rights action on January 3, 2020, and the Complaint was docketed on January 14, 2020. (ECF No. 4.) The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1), and Local Rules of Court 72.C and 72.D.

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 41), filed on October 15, 2020, recommended that the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 31) filed by Defendants McClenahan, Hinson, Capozza, Trempus, Henry, and Salvay be granted. Service was made on Plaintiff via first class mail to his address of record. The parties were informed that in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C), and Rule 72.D.2 of the Local Rules of Court, that they had fourteen (14) days to file any objections, and that unregistered ECF users were given an additional three (3) days pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(d). Plaintiff filed Objections on January 13, 2021. The objections fail to cure the deficiencies highlighted in the Report and Recommendation for essentially the same reasons the Report and Recommendation noted that amendment could not cure the existing deficiencies. Accordingly, after review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, the following Order is entered:

AND NOW, this 15th day of March 2021,

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 31) filed by Defendants McClenahan, Hinson, Capozza, Trempus, Henry, and Salvay is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 41) of Magistrate Judge Lenihan, dated October 15, 2020, is adopted as the opinion of the Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk shall mark this case CLOSED.

s/ David Stewart Cercone

David Stewart Cercone

Senior United States District Judge cc: William Harris

CX-7039

SCI Fayette

48 Overlook Drive

LaBelle, PA 15450-1050

(Via US First Class Mail)

Phillip E. Raymond, Esquire

Annamarie Truckley, Esquire

(Via CM/ECF electronic mail)


Summaries of

Harris v. McClenahan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Mar 15, 2021
2:20-CV-00008-DSC (W.D. Pa. Mar. 15, 2021)
Case details for

Harris v. McClenahan

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. MCCLENAHAN, SERGEANT; HINSON, CORRECTIONS…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Mar 15, 2021

Citations

2:20-CV-00008-DSC (W.D. Pa. Mar. 15, 2021)