Voneida v. Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania et al

Filing 13

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the magistrate judge 9 , directing Vonieda to effect service upon defts in manner provided by Rule 4 of FRCP w/in 30 days of date of entry of this order w/ failure to comly to result in dismissal of action with prejudice, & REMANDING matter to magistrate judge for further proceedings. (See order for complete details.) Signed by Honorable Christopher C. Conner on 11/30/11. (ki)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

KENNETH L. VONEIDA
Plaintiff
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF
PENNSYLVANIA; GOVERNOR TOM
CORBETT; ATTORNEY GENERAL
WILLIAM RYAN JR.; and
PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE
COMMISSIONER FRANK NOONAN
Defendants

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:11-CV-0865
(Judge Conner)

ORDER
AND NOW, this 30th of November, 2011, upon consideration of the report and
recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Andrew Smyser (Doc. 9),
recommending that the court order plaintiff Kenneth L. Voneida (“Voneida”) to effect
service upon the defendants, and following an independent review of the record and
noting that Voneida filed objections1 to the report on November 1, 2011 (Doc. 10), and the
court finding Judge Smyser’s analysis to be thorough and well-reasoned, and the court
finding defendant’s objections to be without merit and squarely addressed by Judge
Smyser’s report, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1

Where objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation are
filed, the court must perform a de novo review of the contested portions of the
report. Supinski v. United Parcel Serv., Civ. A. No. 06-0793, 2009 WL 113796, at *3
(M.D. Pa. Jan. 16, 2009) (citing Sample v. Diecks, 885 F.2d 1099, 1106 n. 3 (3d Cir.
1989); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c)). “In this regard, Local Rule of Court 72.3 requires
‘written objections which . . . specifically identify the portions of the proposed
findings, recommendations or report to which objection is made and the basis for
those objections.’” Id. (citing Shields v. Astrue, Civ. A. No. 07-417, 2008 WL
4186951, at *6 (M.D. Pa. Sept. 8, 2008)).

1.

The report and recommendation of the magistrate judge (Doc. 9) are
ADOPTED.

2.

Voneida is directed to effect service upon the defendants in the manner
provided by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure within thirty (30)
days of entry of this order. Failure to comply with this order will result in
dismissal of the above-captioned case with prejudice.

3.

The above-captioned matter is REMANDED to the magistrate judge for
further proceedings.

S/ Christopher C. Conner
CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER
United States District Judge