explaining judges should give some review to every report and recommendation
How later courts described this case
- explaining judges should give some review to every report and recommendation
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
KASHIF M. ROBERTSON, :
Plaintiff : CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:20-1736
v. : (JUDGE MANNION)
RICHARD ANGLEMEYER, et al., :
Defendants :
O R D E R
Pending before the court is the January 31, 2022 report of United
States Magistrate Judge Susan Schwab, (Doc. 48), which recommends that
the defendants’ motion to dismiss, (Doc. 32), plaintiff’s amended complaint,
(Doc. 30), be granted. No objections have been filed to Judge Schwab’s
report by either the plaintiff or the defendants and, the time within which they
were due has lapsed.
Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, the court
should, as a matter of good practice, Asatisfy itself that there is no clear error
on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.@ 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 judges
should give some review to every report and recommendation)).
Nevertheless, whether timely objections are made or not, the district court
may accept, not accept, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. '636(b)(1);
Local Rule 72.31.
Plaintiff Kashif M. Robertson filed his pro se amended complaint on
April 28, 2021. (Doc. 30). Plaintiff essentially alleges that the two Dauphin
County probation officer defendants, Richard Anglemeyer and Jason
Snyder, violated his 8th Amendment rights by keeping him on supervised
parole for about two months, i.e., from March 1, 2020, to April 28, 2020, after
his maximum sentence expired. On May 18, 2021, defendants filed their
motion to dismiss plaintiff’s amended complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.
12(b)(6). (Doc. 32).
The report recommends that the motion to dismiss be granted with
respect to plaintiff’s claims for damages against defendants in their official
capacities since they are barred by the 11th Amendment. However, it finds
that the damages claims against defendants in their personal capacities are
not barred by the 11th Amendment.
The report next finds that plaintiff’s claims against defendants in their
official capacities for injunctive relief are barred by the 11th Amendment since
plaintiff is seeking relief for past conduct of the defendants, i.e., he alleges
that the defendants in the past miscalculated his sentences, as opposed to
alleging that in the foreseeable future he is likely to suffer injury from the
defendants’ conduct.
The report also finds that defendants are not entitled to dismissal of
the plaintiff’s claims for damages based on absolute immunity in their
positions as probation officers since it is not clear if the defendants were
engaged in adjudicatory duties.
Further, the report finds that defendants are not entitled to dismissal of
plaintiff’s amended complaint based on Heck’s favorable-termination rule
since plaintiff has sufficiently alleged that he received a favorable termination
as to the calculation of this sentence in his 2016 Dauphin County Court
criminal case.
However, the report finds that defendants are entitled to qualified
immunity as to plaintiff’s claim for damages in their personal capacities since
it concludes that the defendants did not violate clearly established federal
law.
The court has considered the findings in Judge Schwab’s report and
finds no clear error of law. In short, the court agrees with the sound reasoning
which has led Judge Schwab to the conclusions in her report, and her
recommendations that the defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted and the
amended complaint be dismissed.
As such, the report and recommendation will be adopted in its entirety
as the opinion of the court.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
(1) The report and recommendation of Judge Schwab, (Doc. 48), is
ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY AS THE RULING OF THE COURT.
(2) The defendants’ motion to dismiss, (Doc. 32), plaintiff’s amended
complaint, (Doc. 30), is GRANTED.
(3) The plaintiff’s amended complaint, (Doc. 30), is DISMISSED.
(4) The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE THIS CASE.
s/ Malachy E. Mannion
MALACHY E. MANNION
United States District Judge
DATE: March , 2022
20-1736-01