IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ANTHONY TYSON, ) Plaintiff, VS. Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-061 ) Judge Stephanie L. Haines PAUL ENGLISH, et al., ) Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly Defendants. ) MEMORANDUM ORDER Presently before the Court is a Motion for Injunctive Relief and Restraining Order (ECF No. 13) filed pro se by Anthony Tyson (“Plaintiff”). Plaintiff was incarcerated at State Correctional Institution at Houtzdale (“SCI-Houtzdale”) when he claims that Defendant security officers retaliated against him. Plaintiff states that the officers called him a “snitch rat” in front of other inmates causing his safety to be jeopardized. Plaintiff also alleges that the officers planted narcotics in his cell before a search causing disciplinary action to be taken against him. Plaintiff seeks an order to prevent any named Defendant from tampering with his legal mail and to prevent any named Defendant from harassing him. On March 10, 2025, Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelley filed a Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 27) recommending that Plaintiff's Motion for Injunctive Relief and Restraining Order (ECF No. 13) be denied as moot. Judge Kelly finds that Plaintiff has been transferred from SCI-Houtzdale to SCI-Smithfield and the transfer forecloses the requested injunctive relief. Petitioner was advised he had seventeen days to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. See 28 U.S.C.§ 636 (b)(1)(B) and (C) and Local Civil Rule 72.D.2. Petitioner has not filed any objections, and the time to do so has expired.

Upon review of the record and the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 27) under the applicable “reasoned consideration” standard, see EEOC v. City of Long Branch,

(3d Cir. 2017) (standard of review when no timely and specific objections are filed), and pursuant to Local Civil Rule 72.D.2, the Court will accept in whole the findings and recommendations of Magistrate Judge Kelly in this matter. Accordingly, the following order is entered: ORDER AND NOW, this 21% day of April, 2025, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff?s Motion for Injunctive Relief and Restraining Order (ECF No. 13) hereby is DENIED as moot; and, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Kelly’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 27) is adopted as the Opinion of the Court; and, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that jurisdiction of this case is returned to Magistrate Judge Kelly for further proceedings.

We Aub 6 7, _” Stephanie L. Haines United States District Judge