David Daniel Ramos v. Blair County Prison, et al.

• Court: District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
• Decided: February 2, 2026
• Docket: 3:25-cv-00287
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA DAVID DANIEL RAMOS, ) Plaintiff, VS. Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-287 ) Judge Stephanie L. Haines BLAIR COUNTY PRISON, et al., ) Magistrate Judge Keith A. Pesto Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER Presently before the Court is a Complaint in Civil Action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 filed pro se by David Daniel Ramos (“Plaintiff”) (ECF No. 7). Plaintiff asserts that while he was

a pretrial detainee at Blair County Prison his civil rights were violated because of the deplorable condition of the prison. This case was referred to Magistrate Judge Keith A. Pesto for proceedings in accordance with the Federal Magistrates Act, 28 U.S. C. § 636, and Local Civil Rule 72.D. On October 31, 2025, Magistrate Judge Pesto filed a Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 8) recommending that Plaintiff's Complaint (ECF No. 7) be dismissed for failure to state a claim with leave to amend. ECF No. 8, p. 1. Plaintiff was advised he had fourteen days to file written objections. See 28 U.S.C.§ 636 (b)(1)(B) and (C) and Local Civil Rule 72.D.2. Judge Pesto also provided Plaintiff with the same deadline to file an amended complaint (“Amended Complaint due by November 17, 2026). Plaintiff did not file any pleadings or correspond with the Court in any way, and the time to do so has expired. Upon review of the record and the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 8) under the applicable “reasoned consideration” standard, see EEOC v. City of Long Branch, 866 F.3d 93, 100 (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 Pesto in this matter. Judge Pesto correctly determined that Plaintiff's Complaint lacked sufficient detail for a plausible claim. Paying deference to Plaintiffs pro se status, this Court will allow an additional month in which he may file an amended complaint. Accordingly, the following order is entered: ORDER AND NOW, this 2™ day of February, 2026, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Pesto’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 8) is adopted as the Opinion of the Court; and, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Complaint is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint pleading his claims with particularity by March 2, 2026, or his claims may be dismissed with prejudice and the case closed.

cme □ IBZ A LFTs pot gee ft Stephanie L. Haines “" United States District Judge cc: David Daniel Ramos 1706581 Blair County Prison 419 Market Square Alley Hollidaysburg, PA 16648