Kailon Adams v. Arayna Valdez, et al.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

KAILON ADAMS,

Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-CV-302

v. (SAPORITO, J.) (CAMONI, M.J.) ARAYNA VALDEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER Now before the court is a report and recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Sean A. Camoni, in which he recommends that the plaintiff’s third amended complaint (Doc. 30) be dismissed without prejudice. (Doc. 35). The plaintiff’s action stems from an incident where the plaintiff alleges that he sustained personal bodily injuries when defendant Arayna Valdez, a McDonalds employee, threw hot coffee towards his face. (Doc. 35, at 2). Therefore, the plaintiff brings this action against defendant Valdez and various McDonalds franchise owners. ( ). But upon review of the plaintiff’s third amended complaint, however, Judge Camoni notes that the plaintiff fails to invoke the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction under federal question jurisdiction or diversity jurisdiction. He explains that the plaintiff’s “sole claim for

personal injuries does not arise ‘under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States,’” 28 U.S.C. § 1331, and that he fails to invoke the necessary requirements for diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332

because the citizenship of the four defendants is not alleged in the third amended complaint. (Doc. 35, at 6). Therefore, Judge Camoni recommends that the plaintiff’s third amended complaint be dismissed

without prejudice. No timely objections have been filed to the report and recommendation, resulting in the forfeiture of de novo review by this

court. , 488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007); , 812 F.2d 874, 878–79 (3d Cir. 1987). Following an independent review of the report and the record, and

having afforded “reasoned consideration” to the uncontested portions of the report, , 866 F.3d 93, 99 (3d Cir. 2017), we are satisfied “that there is no clear error on the face of the record,”

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee note to 1983 amendment. We find Judge Camoni’s analysis to be well-reasoned and fully supported by the record and applicable law. Accordingly, the court will adopt the report and recommendation in its entirety as the decision of the court.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The report and recommendation of Judge Camoni (Doc. 35) is ADOPTED in its entirety;

2. The plaintiff’s third amended complaint (Doc. 30) is DISMISSED without prejudice; and 3. The Clerk of Court shall close the case.

Dated: June 18, 2026 JOSEPH F. SAPORITO, JR. United States District Judge