Parham v. Young
Parham v. Young
Trial Court Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
BECKLEY DIVISION
MARCUS DWAYNE PARHAM,
Petitioner,
v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:17-cv-02016
B. J. MEEKS, Warden,
Respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On March 27, 2017, the Petitioner, appearing pro se, filed an Application Under
28 U.S.C. § 2241for Writ of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State or Federal Custody (Documents 1) and a Memorandum in Support of Motion Pursuant to Title
28 United States Code §§ 2241& 2255(e) (Document 2). By Standing Order (Document 4) entered on March 28, 2017, this action 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
28 U.S.C. § 636. On October 4, 2018, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 15) wherein it is recommended that this Court transfer the Petitioner’s Application (Document 1) and Memorandum (Document 2) to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1631, and dismiss this action from the 1 Court’s docket. Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by October 22, 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,
474 U.S. 140, 150(1985). Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the Petitioner’s right to appeal this Court’s Order.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Snyder v. Ridenour,
889 F.2d 1363, 1366(4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce,
727 F.2d 91, 94(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 (Document 1) and Memorandum (Document 2) be TRANSFERRED to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1631, and that this action be DISMISSED 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: October 29, 2018
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
Reference
- Status
- Unknown