IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DANNY KEITH MERTSOCK, : CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:15-CV-2363

:

Plaintiff : (Chief Judge Conner)

:

v. :

:

BRADLEY BUCCHOLZ, :

:

Defendant :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 14th day of January, 2016, upon consideration of the report 

(Doc. 5) of Chief Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson, recommending the court 

dismiss the civil rights complaint (Doc. 1) of pro se plaintiff Danny Keith Mertsock 

(“Mertsock”), for failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (see Doc. 5), wherein Judge 

Carlson observes that the bulk of Mertsock’s claims are time-barred by the two-year 

statute of limitations governing civil rights claims, (see id. at 7-8), and it appearing 

that Mertsock did not object to the report, see FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(2), and the court 

noting that failure of a party to timely object to a magistrate judge’s conclusions 

“may result in forfeiture of de novo review at the district court level,” Nara v. Frank, 

488 F.3d 187, 194 (3d Cir. 2007) (citing Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878-79 

(3d Cir. 1987)), but that, as a matter of good practice, a district court should “afford 

some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report,” Henderson, 812 

F.2d at 878; see also Taylor v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 83 F. Supp. 3d 625, 626 (M.D. Pa. 

Case 4:15-cv-02363-CCC Document 8 Filed 01/14/16 Page 1 of 2
2015) (citing Univac Dental Co. v. Dentsply Intern., Inc., 702 F. Supp. 2d 465, 469 

(M.D. Pa. 2010)), in order to “satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face 

of the record,” FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), advisory committee notes, and, following an 

independent review of the record, the court in agreement with Judge Carlson that, 

to the extent Mertsock’s civil rights claims predate the filing of his complaint by 

more than two years, those claims are barred by the statute of limitations, and 

concluding that there is no clear error on the face of the record, it is hereby 

ORDERED that:

1. The report (Doc. 5) of Chief Magistrate Judge Carlson is ADOPTED.

2. Mertsock’s civil rights claims predating December of 2013 are 

DISMISSED without prejudice.

3. Mertsock is granted leave to amend his pleading within twenty (20) 

days of the date of this order, consistent with paragraph 2 above and 

the report (Doc. 5) of Chief Magistrate Judge Carlson. Any amended 

pleading filed pursuant to this paragraph shall be filed to the same 

docket number as the instant action, shall be titled “First Amended 

Complaint,” and shall be complete in all respects. It shall be a new 

pleading which stands by itself as an adequate complaint under the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, without reference to the complaint 

(Doc. 1) hereinabove partially dismissed.

4. In the absence of a timely filed amended complaint, the case will 

proceed only on those claims that fall within the limitations period.

5. This matter is REMANDED to Chief Magistrate Judge Carlson for 

further pretrial management.

/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER

Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge

United States District Court

Middle District of Pennsylvania

Case 4:15-cv-02363-CCC Document 8 Filed 01/14/16 Page 2 of 2