Ball v. Bower et al

Filing 44

ORDER - IT IS ORDERED that the REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION is ADOPTED and Dfts Warden, Lycoming County Jail, Jane Doe and John Doe's Mtn to Dismiss is GRANTED. 31 11 Signed by Chief Judge Yvette Kane on Dec. 21, 2011. (sc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
DAWN MARIE BALL,
Plaintiff
v.
LT. BOWER, et al.,
Defendants

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Civil No. 1:10-CV-2561
(Chief Judge Kane)
(Magistrate Judge Carlson)

ORDER
NOW, on this 21st day of December 2011, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT upon a
de novo review of Magistrate Judge Carlson’s October 13, 2011 Report and Recommendation
(Doc. No. 31) and Plaintiff Dawn Marie Ball’s objections thereto1 (Doc. Nos. 33, 34), the Report
and Recommendation (Doc. No. 31) is ADOPTED and Defendants Warden, Lycoming County
Jail, Jane Doe and John Doe’s motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 11) is GRANTED.

S/ Yvette Kane
Yvette Kane, Chief Judge
United States District Court
Middle District of Pennsylvania

1

The objections relate solely to the Court’s order referring this matter to Magistrate
Carlson without Plaintiff’s consent. As has been noted by both this Court and Magistrate Judge
Carlson, the Federal Magistrates Act grants the Court the authority to refer matters to a
magistrate judge without the consent of the parties including pretrial matters, 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(A), as well as dispositive motions, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)-(C). See, e.g., Beazer E.,
Inc. v. Mead Corp., 412 F.3d 429, 438 (3d Cir. 2005) (“The Magistrates Act authorizes district
courts to appoint magistrate judges to consider pretrial matters without regard to the parties’
consent.”); In re U.S. Healthcare, 159 F.3d 142, 145 (3d Cir. 1998) (noting district courts may
refer dispositive motions to a magistrate judge for a report and recommendation without a
party’s consent).