ROSADO et al v. STRETEL et al

Filing 17

ORDER THAT PLFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PERMANET INJUNCTION AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF (ECF. NO. 12) IS DENIED AS UNNECESSARY BECAUSE MR. ROSADO HAS ALREADY GIVEN MR. ROSADO LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLA INT IN THIS MATTER. THE COURT HAS CONSTRUED MR. ROSADO'S FILINGS AS HIS AMENDED COMPLAINT IN THIS MATTER. SO CONSTRUED, THE AMENDED COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS AND FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL CLOSE THIS CASE.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE C. DARNELL JONES, II ON 2/28/18. 3/1/18 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PLFF. (pr, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
GERONIMO ROSADO FRATI CELLI, JR.
Plaintiff

:

F/~E0

CIVIL ACTION

FEB 2 8 2018

v.

8 KATE 13AR~8AA.

PHYLLIS R. STRETEL, et al.
Defendants

~---- '':""'llV, Clerk
--:-De,;. Clerk

NO. 17-3343

ORDER
AND NOW, this

:J f fey of February, 2018, upon consideration of Mr. Rosado's

"Motion for Leave to File Leave to File Amended Complaint for Permanet [sic] Injunction and
Other Equitable Relief' (ECF No. 12), Exhibit (ECF No. 13), "Affidavit and Certificate of
Merit" (ECF No. 14), and "Certificate of Merit and Resolution" (ECF No. 15), it is ORDERED
that:
1.

"Motion for Leave to File Leave to File Amended Complaint for Permanet [sic]

Injunction and Other Equitable Relief' (ECF No. 12) is DENIED as unnecessary because Mr.
Rosado has already given Mr. Rosado leave to file an amended complaint in this matter.
2.

The Court has construed Mr. Rosado's filings as his amended complaint in this

matter. So construed, the amended complaint is DISMISSED as frivolous and for failure to state
a claim, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii), for the reasons stated in the Court's
Memorandum. Mr. Rosado's claims are dismissed with prejudice with the exception of (1) any
claims that were dismissed based solely on Heck v. Humprhey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994),
which are dismissed without prejudice to Mr. Rosado filing those claims in a new civil action in
the event his convictions are ever vacated or invalidated; and (2) claims based on the July 21,

2017 incident with Trooper Dugan, which Mr. Rosado may pursue by initiating a new civil
action against Trooper Dugan. Mr. Rosado may not file an amended complaint in this matter.
3.

The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case.