Opinion
C. A. 21-cv-799
11-08-2021
DENZEL JOHNSON, SR., Plaintiff, v. DENZEL JOHNSON, SR.; COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, a political subdivision/subcorporation of the UNITED STATES, INC.; PHILADELPHIA COUNTY; and KEVIN KAUFFMAN, Slave-Master/Facility Manager and Superintendent of SCI-HUNTINGDON, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Robert J. Colville United States District Judge
Denzel Johnson, Sr. (“Plaintiff”) is a state inmate currently incarcerated at the State Correctional Institution at Huntingdon (“SCI-Huntingdon”) in Huntingdon, Pennsylvania. Presently pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly dated October 18, 2021, in which she recommends, after consideration of the Poulis factors, that this matter be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). (ECF No. 10). No objections have been filed to the Report and Recommendation.
Poulis v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 747 F.2d 863, 868 (3d Cir. 1984).
When no objections are made to the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge, the court should, as a matter of good practice, “satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” 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) (citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987) (explaining judges should give some review to every report and recommendation)). Nevertheless, whether timely objections are made or not, the district court may accept, not accept, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Having conducted a de novo review of the Order, Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 (a), (b)(3), 28 U.S.C. Section 636 (b)(1), the court agrees with the sound reasoning that lead Judge Kelley to conclude that the Poulis factors weigh in favor of dismissal. Accordingly, the Court will adopt the Report and Recommendation that the putative complaint be dismissed pursuant to Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute.
AND NOW, this 8th day of November, 2021, it is hereby ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of Judge Kelly (ECF No. 10) be and the same is hereby ADOPTED as the Opinion of the Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Plaintiff's Complaint (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute and further, the certificate of appealability is hereby DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to mark this case as closed.