Opinion
C. A. 23-92 Erie
04-15-2024
JHEN SCUTELLA, Plaintiff, v. ERIE COUNTY PRISON, et al, Defendants.
RICHARD A. LANZILLO, MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
MEMORANDUM ORDER
SUSAN PARADISE BAXTER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
This action was commenced by Plaintiff s filing of a pro se civil rights complaint accompanied by a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, on March 27, 2023. The matter was referred to Chief United States Magistrate Judge Richard A. Lanzillo for report and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates.
On June 20, 2023, Plaintiff filed a motion for injunctive relief/temporary restraining order [ECF No. 5] seeking an Order directing Defendants to enjoin the Erie County Prison (“ECP”) from violating inmates' constitutional and state rights. On August 4, 2023, Chief Magistrate Judge Lanzillo issued a Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 9] recommending that Plaintiff s motion for temporary restraining order (“TRO motion”) be denied, but that Plaintiff s request for injunctive relief, which was construed as a motion for preliminary injunction, be deferred pending service of his complaint and motion upon Defendants. On October 19, 2023, this Court issued a Memorandum Order adopting Judge Lanzillo's Report and Recommendation, denying Plaintiffs TRO motion, and deferring ruling on Plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunction [ECF No. 5], pending service of Plaintiff s complaint and motion upon Defendants. [ECF No. 14].
After Defendants were served and counsel entered an appearance on their behalf, Plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunction [ECF No. 5] was reactivated on February 22, 2024; however, prior to such time, Plaintiff filed three separate notices of change of address indicating that he is no longer incarcerated at ECP [ECF Nos. 25, 27, 32].
Since Plaintiffs reactivated motion for preliminary injunction [ECF No. 5] sought relief from certain conditions of his pre-trial detention at ECP, Chief Magistrate Judge Lanzillo has issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that Plaintiff s motion be denied as moot. [ECF No. 40]. Objections to the R&R were due to be filed by March 25, 2024; however, no timely objections have been filed.
After de novo review of Plaintiff s motion and relevant documents in the case, together with the report and recommendation, the following order is entered:
AND NOW, this 15th day of April, 2024, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunction [ECF No. 5] is DENIED as moot. The report and recommendation of Chief Magistrate Judge Lanzillo, issued March 25, 2024 [ECF No. 40], is adopted as the opinion of the court.