1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EDGAR C. CALLENDAR, : No. 4:cv 05-0702

:

Plaintiff, : (Judge Jones)

:

v. : (Magistrate Judge Blewitt)

:

DEPUTY WARDEN BOWEN, et al., :

:

Defendants. :

ORDER

June 24, 2005

THE BACKGROUND OF THIS ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:

Plaintiff Edgar C. Callendar (“Plaintiff” or “Callendar”), while an inmate at

the York County Prison, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

This Court has federal question on jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. The

case was referred to Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Blewitt for preliminary review.

On May 13, 2005, Magistrate Judge Blewitt issued a Report recommending

that Callendar’s action be dismissed for failure to file the requisite filing fee or to

submit an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

The time allowed for parties to file objections to the Magistrate Judge’s

report expired on May 31, 2005. Because no objections have been filed, this

Case 4:05-cv-00702-JEJ Document 7 Filed 06/24/05 Page 1 of 3
1

 According to officials at the York County Prison, Callendar has now been deported

from the United States. While this accounts for the return of the notices sent to him, it does not

excuse his failure to pay the filing fee or to complete an in forma pauperis application.

2

matter is ripe for disposition.

When no objections are made to a magistrate’s report, the district court is

not statutorily required to review a magistrate judge’s report before accepting it. 

See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). According to the Third Circuit,

however, “the better practice is to afford some level of review to dispositive legal

issues raised by the report.” Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir.

1987). When a district court accepts a magistrate judge’s report, the report

becomes the judgment of the court. Id. 

Our review of this case confirms the Magistrate Judge’s determinations and

we have not been presented with any reason to revisit them. As noted by

Magistrate Judge Blewitt, Petitioner was sent several notices informing him of the

requirement that he either pay the filing fee or complete an application for leave to

proceed in forma pauperis. The notices were sent to Callendar’s address on record

at York County Prison as well as to an address in Philadelphia that Callendar listed

on his complaint.1

 All documents were returned to the Court as undeliverable. 

Middle District of Pennsylvania Local Rule 83.18 deems documents sent to an

address on file as properly served on that party. Further, Federal Rule of Civil

Case 4:05-cv-00702-JEJ Document 7 Filed 06/24/05 Page 2 of 3
3

Procedure 41(b) permits us to dismiss Callendar’s claim for a “failure to prosecute”

and to otherwise “comply with [an] order of court.” We deem Callendar’s failure

to respond to these notices as a failure to prosecute.

Because we find no error in Magistrate Judge Blewitt’s Report and

Recommendation and because no objections have been filed we will adopt them as

our own.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. Magistrate Judge Blewitt’s Report and Recommendation (Rec. Doc.

5) is adopted in toto.

2. Plaintiff Edgar C. Callendar’s complaint (Rec. Doc. 1) is DISMISSED

without prejudice.

3. The Clerk is directed to close the file on this case.

s/ John E. Jones III 

John E. Jones III

United States District Judge

Case 4:05-cv-00702-JEJ Document 7 Filed 06/24/05 Page 3 of 3