From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Watson v. Catalano

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Oct 27, 2008
Case No. 3:08-cv-191-KRG-KAP (W.D. Pa. Oct. 27, 2008)

Opinion

Case No. 3:08-cv-191-KRG-KAP.

October 27, 2008


MEMORANDUM ORDER


The plaintiff's partial motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of his mail fraud claims, docket no. 15, was referred to Magistrate Judge Keith A. Pesto for proceedings in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3).

The Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation on October 8, 2008, docket no. 16, recommending that plaintiff's motion be denied. The parties were notified that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), they had ten days to serve and file written objections to the Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff filed timely objections, docket no. 17, which repeat the flaws of the original complaint.

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 27th day of October 2008, it is

ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for reconsideration, docket no. 15, is denied. The Report and Recommendation is adopted as the opinion of the Court.


Summaries of

Watson v. Catalano

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Oct 27, 2008
Case No. 3:08-cv-191-KRG-KAP (W.D. Pa. Oct. 27, 2008)
Case details for

Watson v. Catalano

Case Details

Full title:EUGENE WATSON, Plaintiff v. MICHAEL CATALANO, JEFFREY BEARD, and RICHARD…

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

Date published: Oct 27, 2008

Citations

Case No. 3:08-cv-191-KRG-KAP (W.D. Pa. Oct. 27, 2008)