Young v. Lacy

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT BLUEFIELD LARRY ARNOLD YOUNG, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-03633 T.A. LACY; PERRY RICHMAN; and AARON YOUNG, Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending before the court is plaintiff’s pro se request for a temporary restraining order. ECF No. 15. By Standing Order, this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cheryl A. Eifert for submission of findings and recommendations regarding disposition, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).

ECF. No. 5. Magistrate Judge Eifert submitted to the court her Proposed Findings and Recommendation on August 24, 2017, in which she recommended that the district court deny plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order. See ECF No. 21.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the parties were allotted fourteen days, plus three mailing days, in which to file any objections to Magistrate Judge Eifert’s Findings and Recommendation. The failure to file such objections constitutes a waiver of the right to a de novo review by this court. Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363 (4th Cir. 1989).

Plaintiff failed to file any objections to the magistrate judge's Findings and Recommendation within the seventeen-day period. Having reviewed the Findings and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Eifert, the court adopts the findings and recommendation contained therein.

The court hereby ADOPTS the factual and legal analysis contained within the Findings and Recommendation and DENIES plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order. ECF. No. 15.

The Clerk is further directed to forward a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to counsel of record and plaintiff, pro se.

It is SO ORDERED this 5th day of December, 2017.

ENTER: Rautd A Dols David A. Faber Senior United States District Judge