JONES v. COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY

Opinion

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

CARL S. JONES, JR., ANTHONY ) LEE, COURDE DAYE, DAELON ) HILL-JOHNSON, DANIEL ) MILES, DEVIN HALE, GERON ) ANDERSON, JAQUE DAVID, ) Civil Action No. 21-1094 JERMAINE DEHONNEY, JUAN ) HAYDEN, MARIO WALL, ) MARTELL SMITH, ROMAN ) JONES, STEPHEN DAY, and ) District Judge W. Scott Hardy WILLIAM FIELDER, ) Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) . ) COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY and ) WARDEN ORLANDO HARPER, ) ) Defendants. MEMORANDUM ORDER This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) entered by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on June 24, 2022. (Docket No. 96). As background, the case was initiated by Plaintiff Carl S. Jones, Jr. on behalf of himself and 29 other individuals who currently are, or formerly were, confined at the Allegheny County Jail (“ACJ”). The Complaint alleges that Defendants County of Allegheny and Warden Orlando Harper took insufficient precautions at the ACJ to protect Plaintiffs from the COVID-19 virus which caused them to become infected with the virus. (See Docket No. 6). Consequently, Plaintiffs assert an Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment conditions of confinement claim against Warden Harper and the County of Allegheny, and a Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim against Warden Harper. Liberally construing the Complaint, Plaintiff Jones also appears to be alleging a First Amendment retaliation claim against Warden Harper. Defendants have filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (Docket No. 75). The R&R recommends that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss be granted as to all remaining Plaintiffs. (Docket No. 96 at 1, 16).

Service of the R&R was made on Defendants through the Court’s CM/ECF system, and any objections to same were due by July 8, 2022. Service of the R&R was made on Plaintiffs by mail, and any objections were due by July 11, 2022. Thereafter, no party filed any objections to the R&R. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that a party may file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge, and a district judge must conduct a de novo review of any part of the R&R that has been properly objected to. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2), (b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Here, however, because no party filed any objections to the R&R, this Court reviews the magistrate judge’s decision for plain error. See Tice v. Wilson, 425 F. Supp. 2d 676, 680 (W.D. Pa. 2006); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory

Committee Notes (“When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”). In this case, upon careful review of the R&R and the entire record, including Plaintiffs’ Complaint, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and supporting brief, Plaintiff Jones’ Response in opposition, Defendants’ Reply, and Plaintiff Jones’ Sur-reply (Docket Nos. 6, 75, 76, 91, 92, 95, 97), and finding no plain error on the face of the record, the Court will accept Judge Lenihan’s recommendation.1 As such, the Court will adopt the R&R as the Opinion of the Court, and will grant Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss as more specifically set forth below.

1 Although only Plaintiff Jones responded to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, the Court’s analysis set forth in the R&R and adopted herein is equally applicable to all remaining Plaintiffs who failed to respond. Accordingly, in view of the foregoing, the Court enters the following Order: AND NOW, this 18th day of July, 2022, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the R&R (Docket No. 96) is ADOPTED as the Opinion of the Court;

For the reasons set forth in the R&R, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) (Docket No. 75) is GRANTED as to all remaining Plaintiffs; and, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall mark this case CLOSED. s/ W. Scott Hardy W. Scott Hardy United States District Judge

cc: All counsel of record (via ECF)

Carl S. Jones, Jr. (via U.S. mail) QK9540 SCI Coal Township 1 Kelley Drive Coal Township, PA 17866

Anthony Lee, 75466 Courde Daye, 179147 Daelon Hill-Johnson, 180163 Daniel Miles, 142047 Devin Hale, 183220 Geron Anderson, 173396 Jaque David, 159376 Jermaine Dehonney, 163725 Juan Hayden, 19930 Mario Wall, 95319 Martell Smith, 46430 Roman Jones, 158919 Stephen Day, 96266 William Fielder, 109922 All of the above individuals (via U.S. mail) at the following: Allegheny County Jail 950 Second Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15219