Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-1947
09-17-2018
B. MILLER, #JG5529, Plaintiff v. C/O D.J. LUCAS, et al., Defendants
( ) ORDER
AND NOW, this 17th day of September, 2018, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 26) of Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr., recommending the court grant defendants' motion (Doc. 22) to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and dismiss the second amended complaint filed by pro se plaintiff B. Miller ("Miller") without leave to amend, and it appearing that neither Miller nor any defendant has objected to the report, see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and the court noting that failure to timely object to a magistrate judge's conclusions "may result in forfeiture of de novo review at the district court level," Nara v. Frank, 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007) (citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878-79 (3d Cir. 1987)), but that, as a matter of good practice, a district court should "afford some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report," Henderson, 812 F.2d at 878; see also Taylor v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 83 F. Supp. 3d 625, 626 (M.D. Pa. 2015) (citing Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Int'l, Inc., 702 F. Supp. 2d 465, 469 (M.D. Pa. 2010)), in order to "satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record," FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes, and, following an independent review of the record, the court being in agreement with Judge Saporito's recommendation, and concluding that there is no clear error on the face of the record, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The report (Doc. 26) of Magistrate Judge Saporito is ADOPTED.
2. Defendants' motion (Doc. 22) to dismiss is GRANTED.
3. Miller's second amended complaint (Doc. 14) is DISMISSED without leave to amend.
4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.
/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER
Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge
United States District Court
Middle District of Pennsylvania