Cecil Francis v. Doctor Mullens

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN CECIL FRANCIS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No. 3:23-cv-0039 v. ) ) DOCTOR MULLENS, ) ) Defendant. ) ) ORDER THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Ruth Miller, filed on January 17, 2024, recommending that this matter be transferred to the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia. (ECF No. 3.) The Court conducted a de novo review of the record and has made an independent determOinRaDtiEonR EfiDnd ing no error. Accordingly, it is hereby APPROVED ADthOaPt TthEeD Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 3, is ORDE aRnEdD as an Order of this CTouRrAt NasS FifE fRully set forth hereinU;n itit iesd fu Srttahteers District Court for tthhaet Wthees Ctelerrnk D oifs tCroicutr to fs hVairllg inia this case to the ORDERED ; it is further that a copy of this Order shall be provided to Cecil Francis via certified mail with the return receipt docketed in this case; and it is further See Hill v. Barnacle , 655 Fed. Appx. 14E2l,m 1e4n8d (o3rdf GCriar.f i2c0a1, I6n)c (. ovp. iDn.iSn. gA tmheart itchae, Idnics.trict court is not required to make separate findings or conclusions when reviewing a Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation de novo under 28 U.SC. § 636(b)) (citing , 48 F.3d 46, 49-50 (1st Cir. 1995) (opining that “[28 U.S.C. § 636(b)] authorizes the district court to adopt in whole as well as in part the proposed findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge. Where, as here, the magistrate judge decided OCardsee rN o. 3:23-cv-0039 Page 2 ofO 2R DERED CLOSE Dated: that follow ing tra nsfer, t he Clerk ofR Coobuerrtt sAh. aMllo lloy this c ase.

ROBERT A. MOLLOY April 1 3, 2026 /Csh/i ef Judge