Pew v. Sherman

Opinion

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

ALFONSO PERCY PEW, No. 1:21-CV-00949

Plaintiff, (Chief Judge Brann)

v. (Magistrate Judge Carlson)

LT. SHERMAN, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER MAY 6, 2022 Alfonso Percy Pew filed an amended 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint alleging that numerous individuals violated his civil rights by refusing to move him from a cell block guarded by an officer against whom Pew had lodged a complaint.1 Defendants have now filed a motion to revoke Pew’s in forma pauperis status.2 On April 8, 2022, Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that this Court deny Defendants’ motion.3 No timely objections were filed to this Report and Recommendation. Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, this Court will review the recommendation only for clear error.4 Regardless of whether objections

1 Doc. 20. 2 Doc. 29. 3 Doc. 42. 4 Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes; see Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987) (explaining that court should in some manner review recommendations are made, district courts may accept, reject, or modify—in whole or in part—the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.5 Upon review of the

record, the Court finds no error in Magistrate Judge Carlson’s conclusion that Pew should be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Consequently, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 42) is ADOPTED; 2. Defendants’ motion to revoke Pew’s in forma pauperis status (Doc. 29) is DENIED; and

3. This matter is REMANDED to Magistrate Judge Carlson for further proceedings.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Matthew W. Brann Matthew W. Brann Chief United States District Judge