Harris v. Clark et al
Filing
5
ORDER. ORDERED, that the 3 Report-Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Randolph F. Treece filed 10/4/2011 is ACCEPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein and it is further ORDERED that the complaint is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Signed by Chief Judge Gary L. Sharpe on 1/27/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Report-Recommendation and Order) (dpk)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ROGER L. HARRIS,
Plaintiff,
-v.Civil Action No.
1:11-cv-949 (GLS/RFT)
CHRISTINE CLARK; VINCENT VERSACI;
GUIDO LOYOLA; and CARL G. FALOTICO,
Defendants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------APPEARANCES:
OF COUNSEL:
FOR THE PLAINTIFF:
ROGER L. HARRIS
Plaintiff, Pro Se
P.O. Box 4735
Schenectady, New York 12304
GARY L. SHARPE,
Chief Judge
ORDER
The above-captioned matter comes to this court following a ReportRecommendation by Magistrate Judge Randolph F. Treece, duly filed
October 4, 2011. Following ten days from the service thereof, the Clerk has
sent the file, including any and all objections filed by the parties herein.
No objections having been filed, and the court having reviewed the
Magistrate Judge’s Report-Recommendation for clear error, it is hereby
ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation of Magistrate Judge
Randolph F. Treece filed October 4, 2011 is ACCEPTED in its entirety for
the reasons state therein, and it is further
ORDERED, that the complaint is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted;
and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of
this order upon the plaintiff by regular and certified mail.
IT IS SO ORDERED
Dated:
January 27, 2012
Albany, New York
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?