From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ingram v. Lane

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 9, 2018
2:16cv1191 (W.D. Pa. Jul. 9, 2018)

Opinion

2:16cv1191

07-09-2018

STEVEN INGRAM, Plaintiff, v. SUPERINTENDENT LANE and C/O MILLER, Defendants.


Electronic Filing MEMORANDUM ORDER

This prisoner civil rights case was commenced on August 9, 2016, and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cynthia Reed Eddy for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and the Local Rules of Court for Magistrate Judges. Upon Plaintiff's compliance with the statutory requirements, his motion to proceed in forma pauperis was granted on October 13, 2016. (ECF No. 6).

Following the close of discovery, the parties filed cross motions for summary judgment. (ECF Nos. 97 and 104). On May 22, 2018, Magistrate Judge Eddy filed a Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 129) recommending that the motions be denied as genuine issues of material fact exist which preclude the granting of summary judgment. The parties were served with the Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff's request for an extension of time in which to file objections was granted, and the parties were given an extension until June 27, 2018, to file any written objections.

At the time Plaintiff commenced this lawsuit he was an inmate in the custody of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. After the filing of the Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff notified the Court that he was expected to be released from DOC custody on May 31, 2018, and provided a change of address. (ECF No. 133). On May 31, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Clarification and Motion for Extension of time in which to respond to the Report and Recommendation. (ECF No. 131). --------

To date, neither Plaintiff nor Defendants have filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation nor has any party sought a further extension of time in which to do so.

The Court has reviewed the matter and concludes that the Report and Recommendation correctly analyzes the issues and makes a sound recommendation. Accordingly, 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 9th day of July, 2018;

Because genuine issues of material fact exist, IT IS ORDERED that the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment (ECF Nos. 97 and 104) are DENIED;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation filed on May 22, 2018 (ECF No. 129) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.

/s/_________

David Stewart Cercone

Senior United States District Judge cc: Steven Ingram

30 South Blainsport Rd.

Reinholds, PA 17569

(Via First Class Mail)

Sandra A. Kozlowski, Esquire

(Via CM/ECF Electronic Mail)


Summaries of

Ingram v. Lane

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 9, 2018
2:16cv1191 (W.D. Pa. Jul. 9, 2018)
Case details for

Ingram v. Lane

Case Details

Full title:STEVEN INGRAM, Plaintiff, v. SUPERINTENDENT LANE and C/O MILLER…

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

Date published: Jul 9, 2018

Citations

2:16cv1191 (W.D. Pa. Jul. 9, 2018)

Citing Cases

Glenn v. Lundy

B. Exhaustion of Sexual Abuse and/or Sexual Harassment Claims Allegations of sexual abuse or sexual…