Pablo David Reyes Ponce v. Attorney General of the U.S., et al.

Opinion

. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA PABLO DAVID REYES PONCE, ) Plaintiff, VS. Civil Action No, 3:25-cv-382 ) Judge Stephanie L. Haines ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE U.S., et. ) Magistrate Judge Kezia O.L.Taylor al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER-_ Presently before the Court is an Amended Complaint in Civil Action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 filed pro se by Pablo David Reyes Ponce (“Plaintiff”) (ECF No. 7). In his Amended Complaint Plaintiff asserts that while he was incarcerated at Moshannon Valley Processing Center (“MVPC”) his civil rights were violated when he was subjected to deliberate indifference to serious medical and psychological needs and subjected to inhumane conditions of confinement. The Amended Complaint was referred to Magistrate Judge Kezia Taylor for proceedings in accordance with the Federal Magistrates Act, 28 U.S. C. § 636, and Local Civil Rule 72.D. On December 22, 2025, Magistrate Judge Taylor directed Plaintiff to file a Second Amended Complaint that conforms with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and specifically, Rule 8, which sets forth the general rules of pleading and the requirement for a short and plain statement of a claim showing the complainant is entitled to relief. ECF No. 8, p. 1. Judge Taylor provided Plaintiff with a format and instructions on how to comply with her order and gave a deadline of January 22, 2026, in which to file the Second Amended Complaint. Plaintiff did not file a Second Amended Complaint by the deadline and failed to respond in any way to a subsequent Order to Show Cause issued on February 10, 2026 (ECF No. 9).

On March 13, 2026, Magistrate Judge Taylor filed a Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 10) recommending that Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (ECF No. 7) be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The Parties were advised that they had fourteen days from the date of service of a copy of the Report and Recommendation to file written objections. See 28 U.S.C.§ 636 (b)(1)(B) and (C) and Local Civil Rule 72.D.2. No objections were filed, and the time to do so has expired. Upon review of the record and the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 10) 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 Taylor in this matter. Judge Taylor correctly found, after an evaluation of the facts of this case under the Poulis factors, that the factors weighed in favor of dismissal. ECF No. 10, pp. 3- 8; see also Poulis v. State Farm Fire & Cas, Co., 747 F.2d 863 (3d Cir 1984). Plaintiff failed to respond to Judge Taylor’s order to amend and her order to show cause. Based on Plaintiff's lack of communication to the Court since December 5, 2025, he appears to have abandoned the case. Accordingly, the following order is entered: ORDER AND NOW, this 1%‘ day of April, 2026, IT IS ORDERED that the Amended Complaint (ECF No. 7) is dismissed for failure to prosecute; and, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Taylor’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 10) is adopted as the Opinion of the Court; and, The Clerk of Courts is to mark this case closed.

MS Lf a i □ £ [easel □□□ □□□□ “Stephanie L. Haines United States District Judge Pablo David Reyes Ponce A244086926 Moshannon Valley Processing Center 555 Geo Drive Philipsburg, PA 16866