Richardson v. Fustine

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Richardson v. Fustine

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ANTWAN L. RICHARDSON, : CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-CV-2132 : Plaintiff : (Judge Conner) : v. : : JOSEPH F. HARTYE, et al., : : Defendants : ORDER AND NOW, this 7th day of July, 2021, upon consideration of the report (Doc. 33) of Magistrate Judge William I. Arbuckle, issued following screening review of pro se plaintiff Antwan L. Richardson’s amended complaint (Doc. 30) pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 1915

(e)(2), wherein Judge Arbuckle opines that Richardson’s amended complaint, like its predecessor, (see Docs. 1, 8), fails to state a claim for which relief may be granted, and wherein Judge Arbuckle details at length the various legal and factual deficiencies in Richardson’s claims, (see Doc. 33 at 7-30), and recommends that further leave to amend be denied as futile since Richardson has already once been granted leave to amend, and his amended pleading failed to cure the many defects in his claims, (see

id. at 30-31

), and the court noting that Richardson objects to the report and expresses general disagreement with Judge Arbuckle’s analysis, (see Doc. 38); see also FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and following de novo review of the contested portions of the report, E.E.O.C. v. City of Long Branch,

866 F.3d 93, 99

(3d Cir. 2017) (quoting

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)), and affording “reasoned consideration” to the uncontested portions,

id.

(quoting Henderson v. Carlson,

812 F.2d 874, 878

(3d Cir. 1987)), the court finding that the conclusions reached in the report are well reasoned and fully supported by the record and the applicable law, and finding Richardson’s objections to be without merit and squarely addressed by the report,

it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. Judge Arbuckle’s report (Doc. 33) is ADOPTED.

2. Richardson’s amended complaint (Doc. 30) is DISMISSED without further leave to amend.

3. Richardson’s motion (Doc. 26) to appoint counsel is DENIED as moot.

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

5. Any appeal from this order is deemed to be frivolous and not taken in good faith. See

28 U.S.C. § 1915

(a)(3).

/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER Christopher C. Conner United States District Judge Middle District of Pennsylvania

Reference

Status
Unknown