From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wright v. Pa. Dep't of Corr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jan 28, 2015
2: 14-cv-01678 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 28, 2015)

Opinion

2: 14-cv-01678

01-28-2015

HOWARD B. WRIGHT, Plaintiff, v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, SUPERINTENDENT JOHN C. THOMAS, and SERGEANT KYLE BOOK, Defendants.


Electronic Filing

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Plaintiff, Howard B. Wright, has submitted for filing a civil rights complaint; however, the complaint was not accompanied by either payment of the filing fee or a Motion for Leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cynthia Reed Eddy for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and the Local Rules of Court for Magistrate Judges.

On December 23, 2014, Magistrate Judge Eddy filed a Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 2) recommending that the case be transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania where venue is proper because all of the claims raised in the complaint involve events arising from an incident which occurred on May 29, 2013, while Wright was housed at SCI-Chester, which is located within the territorial limits of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania ("Eastern District").

Plaintiff was served with the Report and Recommendation at his listed address and was advised that he had until January 9, 2015, to file written objections to the Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff has not filed any objections nor has he sought an extension of time in which to do so. However, subsequent to the Report and Recommendation being filed, Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 3), his authorization permitting withdrawal of prison accounts funds (ECF No. 4), and a Supplement to his Complaint (ECF No. 5).

After de novo review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 28th day of January, 2015:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is TRANSFERRED forthwith to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 2) dated December 23, 2014, is ADOPTED as the Opinion of the Court;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 3) is deferred to the transferee court; and

AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Plaintiff has thirty (30) days to file a notice of appeal as provided by Rule 3 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

/s/_________

David Stewart Cercone

United States District Judge cc: HOWARD B. WRIGHT

FP-5050

SCI Smithfield

PO Box 999

1120 Pike Street

Huntingdon, PA 16652

(via First Class Mail)


Summaries of

Wright v. Pa. Dep't of Corr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jan 28, 2015
2: 14-cv-01678 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 28, 2015)
Case details for

Wright v. Pa. Dep't of Corr.

Case Details

Full title:HOWARD B. WRIGHT, Plaintiff, v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Jan 28, 2015

Citations

2: 14-cv-01678 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 28, 2015)