ANDERSON v. FOLINO et al
Filing
107
MEMORANDUM ORDER granting 103 Motion for Extension of Time to File Objections and confirming 101 MEMORANDUM ORDER, granting 88 Motion for Summary Judgment and 91 Motion for Summary Judgment and adopting 100 Report and Recommendation as th e opinion of the Court, and 102 ORDER entering FINAL JUDGMENT; 105 Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment is denied; Pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, plaintiff has thirty (30) days to file a notice of appeal as provided by Rule 3 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Signed by Chief Judge Gary L. Lancaster on 3/11/13. (map)
IN THE UNITED STptTES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
KEITH ANDERSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
LOUIS FOLINO, et ai.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No. 10-937
Chief District Judge Gary L. Lancaster!
Magistrate Judgl~ Cynthia Reed Eddy
MEMORANDUM ORDER
The above captioned case was initiat<::d by the filing of a motion to proceed in forma
pauperis (ECF No.1) on July 15, 2010, and was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge for
pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and
the local rules of court.
On January 23, 2013, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation (ECF
No. 100) recommending that the Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants (ECF Nos.
88 and 91) both be granted. Plaintiff was served with the Report and Recommendation at his
address of record and was advised that he had until February 11, 2013 to file written obj ections
to the Report and Recommendation. No obje,;tions were filed within the requisite time period.
Consequently, on February 16, 2013, I entered an Order granting the Motions for Summary
Judgment filed by Defendants (ECF Nos. 88 and 91), adopted the Report and Recommendation,
closing the case (ECF No. 101) and granted judgment to Defendants in this action (ECF No.
102).
1
On February 21, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Objections
(ECF No. 103) and on February 25, 2013, :filed written Objections (ECF No. 104).
These
objections do not undermine the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.
Therefore, after a second de novo review of the pleadings and documents in this case,
together with the Report and Recommendation, and the recently-filed objections thereto, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED, this
day of March, 2013, that Plaintiffs Motion for Extension of
Time to File Objections (ECF No.1 03) is GR.ANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Memorandum Order (ECF No. 101) and
Judgment Order (ECF No. 102) are CONFIRMED.
Defendants' Motions for Summary
Judgment (ECF Nos. 88 and 91) are granted and the Report and Recommendation (ECF. No.
100), dated January 23,2013, is adopted as the Opinion of the Court
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Pkintiffs Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment (ECF
No. 105) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 4(a) (1 ) of the Federal Rules of
Appellate Procedure, Plaintiff has thirty (30) days to file a notice of appeal as provided by Rule 3
of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Bl/i:t~~
~·on. Gary L. Lancaster,
Chief United States District Judge
2
,C.J.
cc: Hon. Cynthia Reed Eddy,
United States Magistrate Judge
Keith Anderson, AS-32S2
SCI-Rockview
BoxA
Bellefonte, PA 16823-0820
All Counsel of Record
3
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?