RANIERI v. BYRNE et al

Filing 32

ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT (DOC. NO. 13) IS GRANTED; PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRO BONO COUNSEL (DOC. NO. 29) IS DENIED AND THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL CLOSE THIS CASE FOR STATISTICAL PUPROSES. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOEL H. SLOMSKY ON 1/4/17. 1/5/17 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PLAINTIFF AND E-MAILED. (jpd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
DANIEL RANIERI,
Plaintiff,

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 16-2686

v.
WARDEN DAVID BYRNE, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER

AND NOW, this 4th day of January 2017, upon consideration of Plaintiff’s Complaint
(Doc. No. 3), Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. No. 13), Plaintiff’s
Responses to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. Nos. 14-16), Defendants’ Supplemental
Motion (Doc. No. 25), Plaintiff’s Responses (Doc. Nos. 26-27), the arguments of the parties at
the October 5, 2016 hearing, Plaintiff’s Motion for Pro Bono Counsel (Doc. No. 29), and in
accordance with the Court’s Opinion issued this day, it is ORDERED that:
1. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. No. 13) is GRANTED;
2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Pro Bono Counsel (Doc. No. 29) is DENIED1; and
3. The Clerk of Court shall close this case for statistical purposes.
BY THE COURT:

/ s/ J oel H. S l om sk y
JOEL H. SLOMSKY, J.

1

Plaintiff has pending in this case a Motion for Appointment of Pro Bono Counsel. (Doc. No.
29.) Because his Complaint is being dismissed for failure to state a claim, and any attempt to
amend the Complaint would be futile, the Motion for Appointment of Pro Bono Counsel (Doc.
No. 29) will be denied.