WATSON v. WETZEL et al

Filing 34

MEMORANDUM ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 24 ) is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff's Complaint is dismissed with prejudice in its entirety with the exception of his Eighth Amendment an d retaliation claims regarding the denial of personal hygiene products against Defendants Onstead and Hunter. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is not permitted to amend his Complaint as it is clear that granting him leave to do so would be futil e. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 31 ) dated January 9, 2013, is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is remanded back to Magistrate Judge Lenihan for all further pretrial proceedings, and as more fully stated in said Memorandum Order. Signed by Judge Kim R. Gibson on 2/8/2013. (dlg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JOSEPH WATSON,
Plaintiff,

v.
JOHN E. WETZEL, Secretary of
DOC; DORINA VARNER, Chief
Grievance Officer; GERALD
ROZUM, Superintendent at SCI
Somerset; JOSEPH, Assistant to the
Superintendent at SCI Somerset;
DAVID HUNTER, Unit Manager at
SCI Somerset; DAVID ONSTEAD,
Unit Manager at SCI Somerset; JACK
LOUGHRY, Business Manager at SCI
Somerset; SUSAN DORR, Mailroom
Supervisor for SCI Somerset and SCI
Laurel Highlands; and DELORES
CHANEY, Administrative for SCI
Somerset and SCI Laurel Highlands,
Defendants.

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

Civil Action No. ll-281J
District Judge Kim R. Gibson
Chief Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

MEMORANDUM ORDER

This case is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation filed by Chief
Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on January 9, 2013.

(ECF No. 31.)

Judge Lenihan

recommended that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 24) be granted in part and denied in
part. Specifically, it was recommended that Plaintiffs Complaint be dismissed in its entirety
with the exception of Plaintiffs Eighth Amendment and retaliation claims regarding the denial
of personal hygiene products against Defendants Onstead and Hunter.

If was further

recommended that Plaintiff not be permitted to amend his Complaint because granting him leave
to do so would be futile.
The parties were served with the Report and Recommendation and informed that they
had until January 28, 2013, to file written objections. As of the date of this Order, however, no
objections have been filed by either party. As such, after de novo review of the pleadings and
documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, the following order is
entered.
AND NOW, this g-lhday ofFebruary, 2013,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 24) is
granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiffs Complaint is dismissed with prejudice in its
entirety with the exception of his Eighth Amendment and retaliation claims regarding the denial
of personal hygiene products against Defendants Onstead and Hunter.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff is not permitted to amend his Complaint as
it is clear that granting him leave to do so would be futile.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 31) dated
January 9, 2013, is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is remanded back to Magistrate
Judge Lenihan for all further pretrial proceedings.

Kim R. Gibson
United States District Judge
2

cc: Joseph Watson
EF-9383
SCI Somerset
11600 Walters Mill Road
Somerset, PA 15510-0001
Via US. Postal Mail
Counsel of Record
Via ECF Electronic Mail

3