JOHNSON v. VAUGHN
ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED; PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT IS DENIED; PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS DENIED; RESPONDENTS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE CONSOLIDATED RESPONSES IS MOOT; THERE IS NO PROBABLE CAUSE TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY; AND THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL MARK THIS CASE CLOSED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY CHIEF JUDGE PETRESE B. TUCKER ON 11/18/13. 11/19/13 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE AND E-MAILED.(ti, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
DONALD T. VAUGHN, et al.,
AND NOW, this ____ day of November, 2013, upon careful consideration of Petitioner’s
Motion for Relief from Judgment (Doc. 82), Petitioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 86),
Respondents’ Motion for Leave to File Consolidated Responses out of Time (Doc. 87), the Report
and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Linda K. Caracappa (Doc. 93), and
Petitioner’s Objections to the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 94), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
AND DECREED that:
1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED;
2. Petitioner’s Motion for Relief from Judgment is DENIED;
3. Petitioner’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED;
4. Respondents’ Motion for Leave to File Consolidated Responses out of Time is MOOT;
5. There is no probable cause to issue a certificate of appealability; and
6. The Clerk of Court shall mark this case closed for statistical purposes.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Petrese B. Tucker
Hon. Petrese B. Tucker, C.J.
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?