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

TONY WERDEBACH, No. 1:19-CV-01198

Plaintiff, (Judge Brann)

v. (Magistrate Judge Arbuckle)

M.L. EBERT, CUMBERLAND COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY,

Defendants.

ORDER AUGUST 12, 2019 Plaintiff removed the instant action to this Court on July 15, 2019, 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 July 19, 2019, Magistrate Judge William I. Arbuckle, to whom this matter is jointly assigned, issued a thorough report and recommendation

1 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B). 2 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). recommending that the matter be remanded back to the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas.

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.”3 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.4

Because I write solely for the parties, I will not restate the facts, but will instead adopt the recitation of facts as set forth by the magistrate judge. I have conducted a de novo review here and found no error.

AND NOW, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Magistrate Judge William I. Arbuckle’s July 19, 2019 Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 4, is ADOPTED in full. 2. The matter is remanded to the Cumberland County Court of Common

Pleas.

3 Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see also Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Intern., Inc.,

(M.D.Pa. 2010) (citing Henderson v. Carlson,

(3d Cir. 1987) (explaining that judges should give some review to every report and recommendation)). 4

(b)(1); Local Rule 72.31. 3. The Clerk is directed to close the case file.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Matthew W. Brann Matthew W. Brann United States District Judge