IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

BECKLEY DIVISION

RYAN DUANE DENT-EL,

Petitioner,

v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:16-cv-09050

D. L. YOUNG, Warden,

Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

On September 22, 2016, the Petitioner, proceeding pro se, filed his Application Under

for Writ of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State or Federal Custody (Document 1). On January 3, 2017, the Respondent filed a Response to Order to Show Cause (Document 9) moving for the dismissal of the Petitioner’s Application. By Standing Order (Document 3) entered on September 23, 2016, the matter was referred to the Honorable Cheryl A. Eifert, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission to this Court of proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition, pursuant to

. On August 30, 2018, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 11) wherein it is recommended that the Petitioner’s Application Under

for Writ of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State or Federal Custody be denied, the Respondent’s Response to Order to Show Cause moving for the dismissal of the Petitioner’s Application be granted, and that this action be dismissed with prejudice, and removed 1 from the Court’s docket. Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by September 17, 2018. Neither party has timely filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Proposed Findings and Recommendation. The Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the findings or recommendation to which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn,

(1985). Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the Petitioner’s right to appeal this Court’s Order.

(b)(1); see also Snyder v. Ridenour,

(4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce,

(4th Cir. 1984). Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the Proposed Findings and Recommendation, and ORDERS that the Petitioner’ s Application Under

] for Writ of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State or Federal Custody (Document 1) be DENIED, the Respondent’s Response to Order to Show Cause (Document 9) moving for the dismissal of the Petitioner's Application be GRANTED, and that this action be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and REMOVED from the Court’s docket. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Order to Magistrate Judge Eifert, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party. ENTER: September 18, 2018

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA