BANKS v. REALTY COUNSELING COMPANY, et al.

Filing 10

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation 8 as the opinion of this Court; that the Plaintiff's "Objections to Report and Recommendation" 9 are denied as Plaintiff has not set forth any facts which undermine Chief Magistrate Judge L enihans conclusion that this case was properly dismissed, with prejudice. To this end, Plaintiffs "Objections" consists of a few factual averments, copies of news articles and emails and other extraneous matters, and fails to even address Chief Magistrate Judge Lenihan's clearly stated reason for dismissing his Complaint, i.e., that "Plaintiff has sued over seventy defendants in this matter, yet fails to identify even one defendant in the body of his three-page complaint.&qu ot; (Docket No. 8 at 4). Accordingly, this Court agrees that Plaintiff's Complaint is properly dismissed for the reasons expressed by Chief Magistrate Judge Lenihan; that Plaintiff's Complaint is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii); that, pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, if any party wishes to appeal from this Order a notice of appeal, as provided in Fed. R. App. P. 3, must be filed with the Clerk of Court, United States District Court, at 700 Grant Street, Room 3110, Pittsburgh, PA 15219, within thirty (30) days. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 8/20/13. (jg)

IN THE UNITED STA"~ES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PEN-JSYLVANIA

FREDERICK BANKS,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)
)

vs.

)
)
)

REALTY COUNSELING COMPANY, et aI.,

Civil Acti m No. 13-1025
Judge No: 'a Barry Fischer
ChiefMa~istrate Judge Lisa Pupn Lenihan

)

Defendants.

)

ORDER

AND NOW, this 20th day of August, 2013, afte' the Plaintiff Frederick Banks,
filed an action in the above-captioned case, and after a Report Lnd Recommendation was filed by
the Chief United States Magistrate Judge granting the parties ultil August 26,201::, to fie
written objections thereto, and upon consideration of the "Obj ~ctions to Report an:1
Recommendation; and Notice of Appeal" filed by Plaintiff [9], and upon

independ~nt

review of

the record, and upon consideration of the Chief Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommmdation
[8], which is adopted as the opinion of this Court,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Plaintiffs "Objections to Report and
Recommendation" [9] are DENIED as PlaintiChas not set forh any facts which U:ldemline
Chief Magistrate Judge Lenihan's conclusion that this case was properly dismissed, ,,-·iH
prejudice. To this end, Plaintiffs "Objections" consists of a £~w factual averment;;, cop es of
news articles and emails and other extraneous matters, and faLs to even address Chieftvlagistrat

...
Judge Lenihan's clearly stated reason for dismissing his Compl:;int, i.e., that "PlainUTbas sued
over seventy defendants in this matter, yet fails to identify even one defendant in the body of his
three-page complaint." (Docket No.8 at 4). Accordingly, this Court agrees that Pla:~ntiff;
Complaint is properly dismissed for the reasons expressed by Chief Magistrate Judge Len han.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs COllplaint is

DISMISS:~D

with

prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.c. §1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Rule 4(a)(l) of the Federal~ules
of Appellate Procedure, if any party wishes to appeal from this Order a notice of appeal, as
provided in Fed. R. App. P. 3, must be filed with the Clerk of C;:mrt, United States Dist~ict Court,
at 700 Grant Street, Room 3110, Pittsburgh, PA 15219, within 1hirty (30) days.

/f(M~~k~
United States Dist~ict Judge

cc/ecf: Honorable Lisa Pupo Lenihan
Chief United States Magistrate Judge

Frederick Banks
P.O. Box 42303

Pittsburgh, PA 15207