Snow v. United States Of America, et al
| Chandar A. Snow |
| Charles E Samuels, United States Of America, B.A. Bledsoe and Special Ambulatory Restraints Team |
| 3:2013cv00789 |
| March 27, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
| Scranton Office |
| Union |
| A. Richard Caputo |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
64
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:(1)The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 63) is ADOPTED. (2) Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 17) is DENIED. (3) Plaintiffs Motion to Stop Summary Judgment and M ove Forward with Discovery (Doc. 57) is DENIED. (4)Plaintiffs Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 59) is DENIED.(5) Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 33) is GRANTED.(6)Judgment is ENTERED in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff on all claims.(7)The Clerk of Court is directed to mark the case as CLOSED.Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 9/3/14. (jam)
|
|
Filing
55
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry)denying Plaintiff's Doc. 49 Motion for Appointment of Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Blewitt on 6/5/14. (ms)
|
|
Filing
27
ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:(1)The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 23) is ADOPTED in part and REJECTED in part.(A)The recommendation to dismiss with prejudice the claims for monetary damages asserted against Defendants in their official capaci ties is ADOPTED. The claims for monetary damages against Defendants in their official capacities are DISMISSED with prejudice.(B)The recommendation to dismiss with prejudice Defendants U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Warden Th omas, BOP Regional Director Samuels, Disciplinary Hearing Officer Jordan, Snider, Counselor Edinger, Case Manager Nichols, Dr. Cannon, and T. Brink is ADOPTED. Defendants U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Warden Thomas, BOP Regi onal Director Samuels, Disciplinary Hearing Officer Jordan, Snider, Counselor Edinger, Case Manager Nichols, Dr. Cannon, and T. Brink are DISMISSED from the action with prejudice. (C)The recommendation to dismiss with prejudice the First Amendment de nial of access to the courts claim is ADOPTED. The First Amendment denial of access to the courts claim is DISMISSED with prejudice. (D)The Recommendation to allow Plaintiff to proceed on the Eighth Amendment denial of medical care claim and Eighth Amendment cruel and unusual punishment (deliberate indifference) claim against Lieutenant Sherman, Lieutenant Johnson, Heather Ladisic, and Beverly Prince is ADOPTED.(E)The recommendation to dismiss with prejudice the Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against The Captain, Lieutenant Sherman, and Lieutenant Johnson is REJECTED. The recommendation to dismiss with prejudice the excessive force claim as to all other Defendants is ADOPTED, and the excessive force claim is DISMISSED with prejudi ce as to all Defendants except The Captain, Lieutenant Sherman, and Lieutenant Johnson.(2)Plaintiffs may PROCEED on the following claims:(A)Eighth Amendment excessive force claim against Defendants The Captain, Lieutenant Sherman, and Lieutenant John son.(B)Eighth Amendment denial of medical care claim against Defendants Lieutenant Sherman, Lieutenant Johnson, Heather Ladisic, and Beverly Prince.(C)Eighth Amendment cruel and unusual punishment (deliberate indifference) claim against Defendants Lieutenant Sherman, Lieutenant Johnson, Heather Ladisic, and Beverly Prince.(3)The matter is RECOMMITTED to Magistrate Judge Blewitt for further proceedings.Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 12/13/13. (jam)
|
|
Filing
15
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (1) Plaintiff's Doc. 13 Motion for Appointment of Counsel is DENIED. (2) Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint within 15 days of the date of this Order which properly alleges claims consistent with our Report and Recommendation (Doc. 8). Failure to timely file an amended complaint will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. See Order for complete details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Blewitt on 10/2/13. (ms)
|
|
Filing
10
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: (1) Upon review of Magistrate Judge Blewitts Report and Recommendation (Doc. 8) for clear error or manifest injustice, the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 8) is ADOPTED. Plaintif f shall file an amended complaint consistent with the Report and Recommendation within thirty (30) days from the date of entry of this Order or the action will be dismissed. (2) Plaintiffs Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 5) is GRANTED. Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2) is DENIED as moot. (3) Plaintiffs Request to Discharge and/or Expunge Administrative Order to pay $350.00 Filing Fee under Civil Action No. 3:13-CV-0789 (Doc 9) is DENIED becaus e Plaintiff filed a complaint and an application to proceed in forma pauperis; 28 U.S.C. § 1915 makes clear that filing fees shall be assessed, and makes no provision for a refund of such fees. Williams v. United States District Court for the Di strict of New Jersey, 455 F. Appx 142, 144 (3d Cir. 2011) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b); Porter v. Dept of Treasury, 564 F.3d 176, 179 (3d Cir. 2009)).(4) The matter is RECOMMITTED to Magistrate Judge Blewitt for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 7/17/13. (jam)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Pennsylvania Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
