Filing 143

MEMORANDUM ORDER dismissing defendants JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-10 for failure to prosecute and adopting 142 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Lenihan as the opinion of the Court. Signed by Judge David S. Cercone on 12/8/17. (njt)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Dwayne Thompson, individually, and on behalf of his minor daughter "RMT" and Pamela McDeavitt, Plaintiffs, v. Kathryn M. Hens-Greco; Kimberly Berkeley Clark, Krista Abram; Shane Mock; Jonathan Voelker; Pernille Frankmar; Voelker & Colton, LLC; Lauren Darbouze; Reserve Township Police; Brian Tully; Fred Boory Jr; Pittsburgh Municipal Court; Barbara Clements; Allegheny County; Patrick Quinn; Christopher Connors; Geraldine M. Redic; Claire Capristo; Allegheny County Sheriffs Department; Anthony Fratto; Holly Zemba; Allegheny County Department of Court Records; Allegheny County Office of Children and Youth Services; Bruce Noel; Brynn Alpee; McKeesport Area School District; Fifth Judicial District; and John and Jane Does, 1-10, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2:16cvl 100 Electronic Filing District Judge Cercone Magistrate Judge Lenihan ECF Nos. 142 MEMORANDUM ORDER This civil action was commenced on July 25, 2016, when Plaintiff Dwayne Thompson filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. (ECF No. 1.) That motion was granted and the Complaint (ECF No. 2) was docketed on July 26, 2016. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(l), and Local Rules of Court 72.C and 72.D. On October 24, 2017, the Magistrate Judge entered an Order that Plaintiff, no later than November 14, 2017, file a document with the court indicating whether he intends to proceed against the unidentified John and Jane Doe Defendants 1-.l 0, and if so, indicating what role they played and what federal rights of Plaintiff they violated. The Magistrate Judge further indicated that if Plaintiff failed to file this document by November 14, 2017, the Magistrate Judge would issue a report and recommendation that the John and Jane Doe Defendants 1-10 be dismissed for failure to prosecute. No such document has been filed by Plaintiff to date. On November 20, 2017, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 142) recommending that the John and Jane Doe Defendants 1-10 be dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Rule 41 (b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Service was made on Plaintiff via first class mail to his address of record, and to all attorneys of record via electronic filing. The parties were informed that in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(B) and (C), and Rule 72.D.2 of the Local Rules of Court, that they had fourteen (14) days to file any objections, and that unregistered ECF users were given an additional three (3) days pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6( d). No objections have been filed. After review of the documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, the ,_ follow~ Order AND NOW, this is entered: _i_ day of December, 2017, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 142) of Magistrate Judge Lenihan, dated November 20, 2017, is adopted as the Opinion of the Court and the John and Jane Doe Defendants 1-10 are DISMISSED for failure to prosecute. David Stewart Cercone United States District Judge 2 cc: Dwayne Thompson 1013 Coal Street Pittsburgh, PA 15221 (Via First Class Mail) Caroline Liebenguth, Esquire Dennis J. Roman, Esquire Charlene S. Seibert, Esquire Timothy R. Stienstraw, Esquire Lauren D. Darbouze, Esquire Ashley N. Rodgers, Esquire Daniel R. Bentz, Esquire Benjamin T.S. Trodden, Esquire Lisa G. Michel, Esquire Anthony G. Sanchez, Esquire (Via CMIECF Electronic Mail) 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?