DAVILA-BAJANA v. SHERMAN et al

Filing 24

MEMORANDUM ORDER: 14 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment is GRANTED; adopting 22 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge Sean J. McLaughlin on 9/19/2007. (rlh)

Download PDF
DAVILA-BAJANA v. SHERMAN et al Doc. 24 Case 1:06-cv-00197-SJM-SPB Document 24 Filed 09/19/2007 Page 1 of 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JUAN DAVILA-BAJANA, Plaintiff, v. JAMES F. SHERMAN, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 06-197 Erie MEMORANDUM ORDER This civil rights action was received by the Clerk of Court on September 1, 2006, and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter for report and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates. The Magistrate Judge's Amended Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 22], filed on August 20, 2007, recommended that Defendants' motion to dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment [Doc. No. 14] be granted. The parties were allowed ten (10) days from the date of service to file objections. Service was made on Plaintiff by certified mail and on Defendants. Plaintiff was granted an extension until September 17, 2007 to file objections [Doc. No. 23]. No objections were filed. After de novo review of the motion and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, the following order is entered: AND NOW, this 19th day of September, 2007; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendants' motion to dismiss or in the alternative for summary judgment [Doc. No. 14] is GRANTED. The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 22] of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed on August 22, 2007, is adopted as the opinion of the Court. s/ Sean J. McLaughlin United States District Judge cm: All parties of record Susan Paradise Baxter, U.S. Magistrate Judge Dockets.Justia.com

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?