Davis v. Saylor et al

Filing 31

ORDER upon de novo review of Magistrate Judge Carlson's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 24); Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 14); Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 21), which is in substance a Brief in Opposition; and all related filings, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 24) is ADOPTED, for the reasons stated therein, namely: a. That it is undisputed that Plaintiff did not exhaust his admi nistrative remedies, (see Comp!., Doc. 1, at 2); b. That Plaintiff has not put forward alegally-recognized explanation for his failure to exhaust; and c. That further discovery could not alleviate this procedural barrier to continuing the litigation. 2. Plaintiffs Objections (Doc. 25) are OVERRULED, because: a. The legal arguments made therein are not supported by applicable law; and b. There is no plausible basis to accept Plaintiffs conclusory argument that the U.S. Attorney's Office' ;s representation of the Government Defendants was unauthorized by federal law.3. Defendant's Motion for Summary (Doc. 14) is GRANTED. 4. Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 21) is DENIED. 5. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close the case. Signed by Honorable Robert D. Mariani on 4/14/14 (jfg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WILLIE DAVIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

3:13-CV-02279
(JUDGE MARIANI)

LT. SAYLOR, et aI.,
Defendants.
ORDER
AND NOW, THIS 14TH DAY OF APRIL, 2014, upon de novo review of Magistrate
Judge Carlson's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 24); Defendants' Motion for Summary
Judgment (Doc. 14); Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss the Defendants' Motion for Summary
Judgment (Doc. 21), which is in substance a Brief in Opposition; and all related filings, IT IS

HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 24) is ADOPTED, for the reasons stated
therein, namely:
a. That it is undisputed that Plaintiff did not exhaust his administrative remedies,
(see Comp!., Doc. 1, at 2);

b. That Plaintiff has not put forward a legally-recognized explanation for his
failure to exhaust; and
c. That further discovery could not alleviate this procedural barrier to continuing
the litigation.

2. Plaintiffs Objections (Doc. 25) are OVERRULED, because:

a. The legal arguments made therein are not supported by applicable law; and
b. There is no plausible basis to accept Plaintiffs conclusory argument that the
U.S. Attorney's Office's representation of the Government Defendants was
unauthorized by federal law.
3. Defendant's Motion for Summary (Doc. 14) is GRANTED.
4. Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 21) is DENIED.
5. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close the case.

2