Floyd v. Commonwealth, PA State Attorney General et al

Filing 21

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT 19 of Magistrate Judge Schwab, DISMISSING Floyd's amended complaint 8 w/ prejudice, directing Clrk of Ct to CLOSE case, & noting any appeal from this order is deemed to be frivolous & not taken in good faith. (See order for complete details.)Signed by Chief Judge Christopher C. Conner on 8/8/17. (ki)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CHARLES FLOYD, JR.,
Plaintiff
v.
COMMONWEALTH, et al.,
Defendants

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:16-CV-1420
(Chief Judge Conner)

ORDER
AND NOW, this 8th day of August, 2017, upon consideration of the
report (Doc. 19) of Chief Magistrate Judge Susan E. Schwab, issued following
comprehensive review of the amended complaint (Doc. 8) of pro se plaintiff Charles
Floyd, Jr. (“Floyd”), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), wherein Judge Schwab
recommends that the court dismiss Floyd’s amended complaint for failure to state a
claim for which relief may be granted, and further recommends that leave to amend
be denied in view of Floyd’s repeated failure to cure the deficiencies identified in his
pleading, (see Doc. 19 at 15-28), and it appearing that no party has objected to the
report,1 see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and the court noting that failure of a party to
timely object to a magistrate judge’s conclusions “may result in forfeiture of de novo

1

On July 3, 2017, the court received correspondence purporting to be
authored by a “Dr. Morganstein” indicating that Floyd had been hospitalized and
would remain hospitalized until approximately July 6, 2017. (Doc. 20). In view of
this correspondence, the court withheld review of Judge Schwab’s report for one
month to allow for late-filed objections by Floyd. Having received none, the court
concludes that Floyd has waived the opportunity to object to the report.

review at the district court level,” Nara v. Frank, 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007)
(citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878-79 (3d Cir. 1987)), but that, as a
matter of good practice, a district court should “afford some level of review to
dispositive legal issues raised by the report,” Henderson, 812 F.2d t 878; see also
Taylor v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 83 F. Supp. 3d 625, 626 (M.D. Pa. 2015) (citing Univac
Dental Co. v. Dentsply Int’l, Inc., 702 F. Supp. 2d 465, 469 (M.D. Pa. 2010)), in order
to “satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record,” FED. R. CIV. P.
72(b), advisory committee notes, and, following independent review of the record,
the court being in full agreement with Judge Schwab’s recommendation, and
concluding that there is no clear error on the face of the record, it is hereby
ORDERED that:
1.

The report (Doc. 19) of Magistrate Judge Schwab is ADOPTED.

2.

Floyd’s amended complaint (Doc. 8) is DISMISSED with prejudice.

3.

The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

4.

Any appeal from this order is deemed to be frivolous and not taken in
good faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).

/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER
Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge
United States District Court
Middle District of Pennsylvania