From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Walker v. Werlinger

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
May 26, 2011
Case No. 3:10-cv-324-KRG-KAP (W.D. Pa. May. 26, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. 3:10-cv-324-KRG-KAP.

May 26, 2011


MEMORANDUM ORDER


Petitioner's motion for reconsideration, docket no. 5, was referred to Magistrate Judge Keith A. Pesto in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Local Rule 72.1 for Magistrate Judges.

The Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation on May 18, 2011, docket no. 6, recommending that the motion be denied. The petitioner was notified, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), that he had fourteen days to file written objections to the Report and Recommendation. Petitioner filed objections which assert his incorrect belief that he can prosecute a prison conditions complaint for the filing fee (unpaid) of a habeas petition. Dismissal without prejudice means that petitioner is free to begin again by filing a complaint with the $350.00 filing paid in full or in installments pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act.

Upon de novo review of the record of this matter, the Report and Recommendation, and the objections thereto, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 26th day of May 2011, it is

ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration, docket no. 5, is denied.


Summaries of

Walker v. Werlinger

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
May 26, 2011
Case No. 3:10-cv-324-KRG-KAP (W.D. Pa. May. 26, 2011)
Case details for

Walker v. Werlinger

Case Details

Full title:JEFFERY M. WALKER, Petitioner, v. ROBERT WERLINGER, WARDEN, F.C.I…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: May 26, 2011

Citations

Case No. 3:10-cv-324-KRG-KAP (W.D. Pa. May. 26, 2011)