Stiefel v. Rychorwicz, 2:16-cv-00975. (2019)
Court: District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20190301g02
Visitors: 12
Filed: Feb. 28, 2019
Latest Update: Feb. 28, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION JOY FLOWERS CONTI , Senior District Judge . This prisoner pro se civil rights case has been referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cynthia Reed Eddy for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate's Act, 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1), and Local Rule of Civil Procedure 72. On January 29, 2019, the magistrate judge issued a report (ECF No. 92) recommending that the motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Cpt. Rychorwicz, C/O Bartlette, and C/O Scullio (ECF
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION JOY FLOWERS CONTI , Senior District Judge . This prisoner pro se civil rights case has been referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cynthia Reed Eddy for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate's Act, 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1), and Local Rule of Civil Procedure 72. On January 29, 2019, the magistrate judge issued a report (ECF No. 92) recommending that the motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Cpt. Rychorwicz, C/O Bartlette, and C/O Scullio (ECF ..
More
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JOY FLOWERS CONTI, Senior District Judge.
This prisoner pro se civil rights case has been referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cynthia Reed Eddy for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate's Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Local Rule of Civil Procedure 72.
On January 29, 2019, the magistrate judge issued a report (ECF No. 92) recommending that the motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Cpt. Rychorwicz, C/O Bartlette, and C/O Scullio (ECF No. 64) be granted. Plaintiff was served with the report and recommendation at his listed address and advised that written objections were due by February 15, 2019. To date, plaintiff has not filed any objections nor has he sought an extension of time in which to do so.1
The court has reviewed the matter and concludes that the report and recommendation correctly analyzes the issues and makes a sound recommendation. Accordingly, after de novo review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the report and recommendation, the report and recommendation will be adopted and summary judgment will be granted to defendants Cpt. Rychorwicz, C/O Bartlette, and C/O Scullio.
An appropriate Order follows.
FootNotes
1. If a party does not file timely objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, the party may lose its right to de novo review by the district court, although the court must still give "reasoned consideration" to the magistrate judge's report before adopting it. Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878-79 (3d Cir. 1987).
Source: Leagle
