Tonkin v. Luzerne County, Pennsylvania
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 16 Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson's Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY; The action is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk is directed to close the case file. Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 11/20/2017. (jn)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
(Magistrate Judge Carlson)
NOVEMBER 20, 2017
Before the Court for disposition is a Report and Recommendation filed by
Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson on October 25, 2017.1 In this Report,
Magistrate Judge Carlson recommended that Plaintiff Clyde Tonkin’s Complaint
be dismissed with prejudice (1) for failure to effectuate service in accordance with
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), and (2), following an application of the
Poulis factors, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41.2 No objections to
this Report and Recommendation have since been filed.
Upon designation, a magistrate judge may “conduct hearings, including
evidentiary hearings, and . . . submit to a judge of the court proposed findings of
ECF No. 16.
fact and recommendations.”3 Once filed, this Report and Recommendation is
disseminated to the parties in the case who then have the opportunity to file written
objections.4 Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, the
court should, as a matter of good practice, “satisfy itself that there is no clear error
on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”5 Nevertheless,
whether timely objections are made or not, the district court may accept, reject or
modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the
Following independent review of the record, I am satisfied that the Report
and Recommendation contains no legal error. In the interests of judicial economy,
I will not rehash Magistrate Judge Carlson’s sound reasoning and legal citation.
AND NOW, therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson’s Report and Recommendation (ECF
No. 16) is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY;
2. The action is DISMISSED with prejudice.
3. The Clerk is directed to close the case file.
28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B).
28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1).
Rieder v. Apfel, 115 F.Supp.2d 496, 499 (M.D.Pa. 2000) (citing United States v. Raddatz,
447 U.S. 667, 676 (1980)).
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule 72.31.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Matthew W. Brann
Matthew W. Brann
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?