Brown v. Lebanon County Prison

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ANGELO BROWN, No. 4:21-CV-1432

Plaintiff, (Chief Judge Brann)

v. (Magistrate Judge Carlson)

LEBANON COUNTY PRISON,

Defendant.

ORDER

OCTOBER 19, 2021

Plaintiff filed the instant action on August 18, 2021, and it was jointly

assigned to the undersigned and to a magistrate judge. Upon designation, a

magistrate judge may “conduct hearings, including evidentiary hearings, and . . .

submit to a judge of the court proposed findings of fact and recommendations.”1

Once filed, this report and recommendation is disseminated to the parties in the

case, who then have the opportunity to file written objections.2

On August 24, 2021, Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson, to whom this

matter is jointly assigned, issued a thorough report and recommendation

recommending that Plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed without prejudice.3

1 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).

2 Id. § 636(b)(1).

No objections to the report and recommendation have been filed. For

portions of the report and recommendation to which no objection is made, the

Court should, as a matter of good practice, “satisfy itself that there is no clear error

on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”4 Regardless of

whether timely objections are made by a party, the District Court may accept, not

accept, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by

the magistrate judge.5

Because this discussion is intended solely for the parties, the Court will not

restate the facts, but will instead adopt the recitation of facts as set forth by the

magistrate judge. The Court has conducted a de novo review here and has found

no error.

AND NOW, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Magistrate Judge Carlson’s Report and Recommendation, Doc. 6, is

ADOPTED in full.

2. Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice.

3. If desired, Plaintiff may file an amended complaint on or before

November 16, 2021. If no amended complaint is timely filed, the

Court will close this case.

4 FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see also Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply

Intern., Inc., 702 F. Supp. 2d 465, 469 (M.D. Pa. 2010) (citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d

874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987) (explaining that judges should give some review to every report and

recommendation)).

4. If Plaintiff desires to proceed in forma pauperis, he must comply with

this Court’s August 18, 2021 Order, Doc. 5, explaining how to apply

for in forma pauperis status. Otherwise, he must submit the filing fee

in the full amount of $402.00 to the Clerk of Court.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Matthew W. Brann

Matthew W. Brann

Chief United States District Judge