ANGLE v. CARTER et al

Filing 66

ORDER re 65 Objections to Report and Recommendation filed by BRYAN ANGLE, II. Signed by Magistrate Judge Richard A. Lanzillo on March 22, 2019. (jbh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
BRYAN ANGLE, II,
Plaintiff,
v.

CAPT. CARTER, LT. DAVIS, LT.
STEED, C.O. JOHN DOE, U.M. PERRY,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1: 16-cv-00276 (Erie)
SUSAN PARADISE BAXTDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
RICHARD A. LANZILLO
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
O R DE R
[In re: ECF No. 65]

Plaintiff Bryan Angle II, has filed a document entitled “Objections to R&R for
TRO/Injunction.” ECF No. 65. These purported objections concern a motion for a temporary
restraining order that Angle claims was filed with this Court on January 10, 2019. The docket
does not reflect the filing of any motion by Angle on that date.
Angle filed a Motion for Injunctive Relief on November 13, 2018. ECF No. 53. The
undersigned submitted a Report and Recommendation to the Court suggesting denial of that
motion on November 15, 2018. ECF No. 56. The Honorable Susan Paradise Baxter, United
States District Judge, adopted the Report and Recommendation on January 2, 2019, and denied
the Motion for Injunctive Relief. ECF No. 57. Further, the undersigned filed a Report and
Recommendation on February 1, 2019 recommending that the Defendants’ Motion for Summary
Judgment be granted in part and denied in part. ECF No. 58. Judge Baxter adopted that Report
and Recommendation and entered an order on February 28, 2019.
Then, on March 4, 2019, Angle filed a document entitled “Motion for Preliminary
Injunction/Emergency Temporary Restraining Order.” ECF No. 61. In actuality, this was a
1

request for a status update on a motion for injunctive relief that Angle claims to have filed on
January 10, 2019. As the Court noted above, no motion was received on that day or any other in
the month of January, 2019. This Court, construing Angle’s motion as one requesting
information on his previous motion for injunctive relief, denied the motion as moot since that
motion had already been ruled on. ECF No. 63.
Turning now to Angle’s most recent filing, that motion is likewise DENIED because it
references a motion not filed on this docket. Should Angle desire to file another motion for
injunctive relief he may do so. The Court expresses no opinion on the merits of any such
motion, however.
A printed copy of the docket will be forwarded to the Plaintiff as a courtesy along with a
copy of this order.
Entered this 22nd day of March, 2019.

s/s Richard A. Lanzillo
RICHARD A. LANZILLO
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2