Harris v. Pennsylvania State Employees et al

Filing 96

ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 1. The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Saporito (Doc. No. 94); 2. Plaintiffs motion for preliminary injunctive relief (Doc. No. 52), is DENIED; 3. Plaintiffs complaint (Doc. No. 1), is DISMISSED as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); and 4. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case. 52 94 Signed by Honorable Yvette Kane on 1/31/17. (sc)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
TAMMY HARRIS,
Plaintiff
v.
PENNSYLVANIA STATE
EMPLOYEES, et al.,
Defendant

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

No. 1:15-cv-01436
(Judge Kane)
(Magistrate Judge Saporito)

ORDER
Before the Court is the January 12, 2017 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate
Judge Saporito. (Doc. No. 94.) No timely objections have been filed.1 Accordingly, on this 31st
day of January 2017, upon independent review of the record and the applicable law, IT IS
ORDERED THAT:
1. The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge
Saporito (Doc. No. 94);
2. Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunctive relief (Doc. No. 52), is DENIED;
3. Plaintiff’s complaint (Doc. No. 1), is DISMISSED as frivolous pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); and
4. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case.

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

1

A review of the docket reveals that Plaintiff mailed a cryptic, four-page, single spaced letter on
Wednesday, January 18, 2017 to the “Scranton Federal Court.” The Court is unable to discern
this letter’s intended meaning, and thus, declines to construe the letter as objections to the Report
and Recommendation.