Still v. Bridon-Bekaert

Full title: NATHANIEL B. STILL, Plaintiff, v. BRIDON-BEKAERT, Defendant.

Court: United States District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania

Date published: Dec 12, 2024

Civil Action 3:24-CV-1374 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 12, 2024)

Opinion

Civil Action 3:24-CV-1374

12-12-2024

NATHANIEL B. STILL, Plaintiff, v. BRIDON-BEKAERT, Defendant.

JOSEPH F. SAPORITO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER

JOSEPH F. SAPORITO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Now before the court is a report and recommendation of Chief United States Magistrate Judge Daryl F. Bloom, in which he recommends that this action be dismissed without prejudice. (Doc. 4).^;

Judge Bloom recommends that the plaintiff's claims against Bridon-Bekaert be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under Title VII of the Civil Rights and failure to demand relief sought under Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. He recommends, however, that the plaintiff still be afforded an opportunity to amend his complaint to endeavor to comply with the requirements of Rule 8.

No timely objections¹ have been filed to the report and recommendation, resulting in the forfeiture of de novo review by this court. See Nara e Frank, 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007); Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878-79 (3d Cir. 1987).

1 The plaintiff filed a letter on November 4, 2024 (Doc. 5). It is unclear, however, whether it's an objection to Chief Magistrate Judge Bloom's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 4), as it recites many of the same issues set forth in his inartfully drafted complaint.

Following an independent review of the report and the record, and having afforded “reasoned consideration” to the uncontested portions of the report, E.E.O.C. v. City of Long-Branch, 866 F.3d 93, 99 (3d Cir. 2017), we are satisfied “that there is no clear error on the face of the record,” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) advisory committee note to 1983 amendment. We find Judge Bloom's analysis to be welbreasoned and fully supported by the record and applicable law. Accordingly, the court will adopt the report and recommendation in its entirety as the decision of the court.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The report and recommendation of Judge Bloom (Doc. 4) is ADOPTED;

2. The plaintiff's complaint against Bridon-Bekaert is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;

3. The plaintiff is granted twenty-one (21) days from the date of this Order to correct the defects cited in Judge Bloom's report by filing an amended complaint; and

4. The matter is remanded to Chief United States Magistrate Judge Bloom for further pre-trial proceedings.