Lyons v. Beard et al

Filing 145

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the magistrate judge 133 , GRANTING deft's MSJ 84 , directing Clrk of Ct to enter jdgmt in favor of deft & against pltf, & directing Clrk of Ct to CLOSE case. (See order for complete details.) Signed by Honorable Christopher C. Conner on 05/24/11. (ki)

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

ERIC LYONS,
Plaintiff
v.
JEFFREY BEARD, et al.,
Defendants

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:07-CV-2278
(Judge Conner)

ORDER
AND NOW, this 24th day of May, 2011, upon consideration of the Report and
Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson (Doc. 133),
recommending that defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 84) be granted,
and, following an independent review of the record and noting that plaintiff filed
objections1 to the report on April 12, 2011 (Doc. 138), and the court finding Judge
Carlson’s analysis to be thorough and well-reasoned, and the court finding plaintiff’s
objections to be without merit and squarely addressed by Judge Carlson’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. 133) are
ADOPTED.

2.

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 84) is GRANTED. The
Clerk of Court is directed to enter JUDGMENT in favor of defendant and
against plaintiff.

3.

The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

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