From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lyons v. Wetzel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Sep 12, 2012
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12-CV-1357 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 12, 2012)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12-CV-1357

09-12-2012

ERIC LYONS, Plaintiff v. JOHN WETZEL, et al., Defendants


(Judge Conner)


ORDER

AND NOW, this 12th day of September, 2012, upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson (Doc. 7), recommending that plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1) be dismissed without prejudice, and, following an independent review of the record and noting that plaintiff filed objections to the report on August 2, 2012 (Doc. 8), and the court finding Judge Carlson's analysis to be thorough and well-reasoned, and the court finding plaintiff's objections to be without merit and squarely addressed by Judge Carlson's report (Doc. 7), it is hereby ORDERED that:

Where objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation are filed, the court must perform a de novo review of the contested portions of the report. Supinski v. United Parcel Serv., Civ. A. No. 06-0793, 2009 WL 113796, at *3 (M.D. Pa. Jan. 16, 2009) (citing Sample v. Diecks, 885 F.2d 1099, 1106 n. 3 (3d Cir. 1989); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c)). "In this regard, Local Rule of Court 72.3 requires 'written objections which . . . specifically identify the portions of the proposed findings, recommendations or report to which objection is made and the basis for those objections.'" Id. (citing Shields v. Astrue, Civ. A. No. 07-417, 2008 WL 4186951, at *6 (M.D. Pa. Sept. 8, 2008)).

1. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Carlson (Doc. 7) are ADOPTED.
2. Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint within twenty (20) days of the date of this order, which must address the deficiencies noted in Judge Carlson's Report and Recommendation. Failure to file an amended complaint in a timely fashion shall be deemed an abandonment of these claims and this matter shall be dismissed with prejudice.
3. The above-captioned case is REMANDED to Magistrate Judge Carlson for further proceedings.

____________________

CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Lyons v. Wetzel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Sep 12, 2012
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12-CV-1357 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 12, 2012)
Case details for

Lyons v. Wetzel

Case Details

Full title:ERIC LYONS, Plaintiff v. JOHN WETZEL, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Sep 12, 2012

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12-CV-1357 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 12, 2012)

Citing Cases

Lyons v. Beard

The claims in that case apparently were resolved by the parties and the litigation was dismissed without…