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

MATTHEW JOHN SHEFFER, No. 4:18-CV-02080

Plaintiff, (Chief Judge Brann)

v. (Chief Magistrate Judge Mehalchick)

CENTRE COUNTY, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER MARCH 7, 2022 Matthew John Sheffer, a Pennsylvania state prisoner, filed this civil rights complaint alleging that numerous defendants violated his rights during the course of his arrest, detention, and conviction in state court.1 In January 2022, Chief Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court grant three motions to dismiss filed by Defendants.2 Sheffer filed timely objections to the Report and Recommendation.3 “If a party objects timely to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the district court must ‘make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.’”4

1 Doc. 1. 2 Doc. 70. 3 Doc. 72. 4 Equal Emp’t Opportunity Comm’n v. City of Long Branch,

(3d Cir. 2017) Regardless of whether timely objections are made, district courts may accept, reject, or modify—in whole or in part—the magistrate judge’s findings or

recommendations.5 After conducting a de novo review of the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds no error in Chief Magistrate Judge Mehalchick’s recommendation that Defendants’ motions to dismiss be granted.6 Consequently, IT

IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Chief Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 70) is ADOPTED; 2. Defendants’ motions to dismiss (Docs. 57, 59, 65) are GRANTED, and

all claims are dismissed with prejudice—with the exception of Sheffer’s

claim against Jeffrey Ebeck, which is dismissed without prejudice;

3. Sheffer’s motion for reconsideration (Doc. 73) is DENIED; and 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case. BY THE COURT:

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

5

(b)(1); Local Rule 72.31. 6 Although Sheffer objects in part because Chief Magistrate Judge Mehalchick notes that the motions to dismiss are unopposed, Doc. 72, that conclusion does not form the basis of her Report and Recommendation, and dismissal is warranted for the reasons set forth by Chief