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

BECKLEY DIVISION

ALFRED LEE MAULDIN,

Petitioner,

v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:17-cv-02312 (Consolidated with Civil Action No. 5:17-cv-02626)

D. L. YOUNG, Warden, FCI Beckley,

Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

The Petitioner, proceeding pro-se, has filed two Petitions for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under

(Document 3 in Case No. 5:17-cv-02312 & Document 1 in Case No. 5:17- cv-02626). The Petitioner has also filed a Motion to Issue an Injunction Against the Warden and Adm/Staff to Stop Withholding Legal Mail (Document 46 in Case No. 5:17-cv-2312). These consolidated actions were referred to the Honorable Dwane L. Tinsley, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission to this Court of proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition, pursuant to

. On January 18, 2019, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 56) wherein it is recommended that the Petitioner’s two Petitions for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under

be denied; the Petitioner’s Motion to Issue an Injunction Against the Warden and Adm/Staff to Stop Withholding Legal Mail be denied as moot; and the consolidated actions be dismissed from the Court’s docket.

1 Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by February 4, 2019, and none were filed by either party. 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 two Petitions for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under

(Document 3 in Case No. 5:17-cv-02312 & Document | in Case No. 5:17- cv-02626) be DENIED; the Petitioner’s Motion to Issue an Injunction Against the Warden and Adm/Staff to Stop Withholding Legal Mail (Document 46 in Case No. 5:17-cv-2312) be DENIED AS MOOT; and these consolidated actions be DISMISSED from the Court’s docket. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Order to Magistrate Judge Tinsley, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party. ENTER: February 7, 2019

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA