Smith v. Department of Defense et al

Filing 8

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of Magistrate Judge Blewitt 6 , DISMISSING pltf's complaint & amended complaint 1 & 15 , w/ prejudice, GRANTING pltf's motion to proceed IFP 2 solely for purpose of filing this action, & directing Clrk of Ct to CLOSE case. (See order for complete details.)Signed by Honorable Christopher C. Conner on 5/14/13. (ki)

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

MARILYN MARIE SMITH,
Plaintiff
v.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, et al.,
Defendants

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:13-CV-336
(Judge Conner)

ORDER
AND NOW, this 14th day of May, 2013, upon consideration of the Report and
Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Blewitt (Doc. 6),
recommending that plaintiff’s Complaint and Amended Complaint (Docs. 1, 5) be
dismissed, and, following an independent review of the record, and noting that plaintiff
filed objections1 to the report (Doc. 7) on April 15, 2013, and the court finding Magistrate
Judge Blewitt’s analysis to be thorough and well-reasoned, and the court finding the
objections to be without merit and squarely addressed by Judge Blewitt’s report (Doc. 6),
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 Magistrate Judge Blewitt (Doc. 6) are
ADOPTED.

2.

Plaintiff’s Complaint and Amended Complaint (Docs. 1, 5) are DISMISSED
with prejudice.

3.

Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED solely for the
purpose of filing this action.

4.

The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

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