Shaffer v. Tinsley et al

- 1 -
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
_____________________________________
WILLIAM E. SHAFFER, JR.,
Plaintiff,
-v- 	3:25-CV-1587 (AJB/CBF)
DR. PAUL TINSLEY et al.,
Defendants.
_____________________________________
APPEARANCES: 	OF COUNSEL:
WILLIAM E. SHAFFER, JR.
Plaintiff, Pro Se
326481
Broome County Correctional Facility
P.O. Box 2047
Binghamton, NY 13902-2047
Hon. Anthony Brindisi, U.S. District Judge:
ORDER ON REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
On November 12, 2025, pro se plaintiff William E. Shaffer, Jr. (“plaintiff”), an individual
in the custody of Broome County, filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that defendants mis-
diagnosed the extent to which his thyroid cancer had metastasized. See Dkt. No. 1. Along with
his complaint, plaintiff moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP Application”). Dkt.
Nos. 2, 3.
On January 23, 2026, U.S. Magistrate Judge Thérèse Wiley Dancks granted plaintiff’s IFP
Application and advised by Report & Recommendation (“R&R”) that plaintiff’s complaint be dis-
missed with leave to amend. Dkt. No. 5. As Judge Dancks explained, neither of the named de-
fendants could be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in federal court because neither defendant qualified
Case 3:25-cv-01587-AJB-CBF Document 8 Filed 02/17/26 Page 1 of 2

- 2 -
as a “state actor” within the meaning of § 1983. Id. However, in light of plaintiff’s pro se status,
Judge Dancks determined that he should be given leave to amend his pleading to try to cure this
defect and to elaborate on the factual basis of his claims. See id.
Plaintiff has not lodged objections, and the time period in which to do so has expired. See
Dkt. No. 5. Upon review for clear error, the R&R is accepted and will be adopted. See F ED. R.
C IV. P. 72(b).
Therefore, it is
ORDERED that
1. The Report & Recommendation (Dkt. No. 5) is ACCEPTED;
2. Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend;
3. Plaintiff shall have THIRTY DAYS from the date of this Order in which to submit an
amended complaint for review;
4. Any amended complaint must conform with the instructions set forth in the R&R;
5. If plaintiff timely files an amended complaint, the Clerk is directed to refer this matter
to the assigned magistrate judge1 for further review and action as appropriate; and
6. If plaintiff does not timely file an amended complaint, the Clerk is directed to enter a
judgment dismissing this action without further Order of the Court.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate the pending motion and set the appropriate
deadlines.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 17, 2026
Utica, New York.
1 This case has been reassigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Carla B. Freedman. Dkt. No. 7.
Case 3:25-cv-01587-AJB-CBF Document 8 Filed 02/17/26 Page 2 of 2