Shelton v. Santander Consumer USA

District Court, S.D. West Virginia

Shelton v. Santander Consumer USA

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

AT BECKLEY

DAVID SHELTON, JR., Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:19-cv-00809 SANTANDER CONSUMER USA,

Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint [Doc. 8], filed December 16, 2019. This action was previously referred to the Honorable Omar J. Aboulhosn, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation (“PF&R”). Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn filed his PF&R on January 21, 2020. Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn recommended that the Court grant the Motion and remove this matter from the Court’s docket. The Court need not 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. See Thomas v. Arn,

474 U.S. 140

(1985); see also

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1) (emphasis added) (“A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”). Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the Petitioner’s right to appeal the Court’s order. See

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1); see also United States v. De Leon-Ramirez,

925 F.3d 177, 181

(4th Cir. 2019) (noting parties may not typically “appeal a magistrate judge’s findings that were not objected to below, as § 636(b) doesn’t require de novo review absent objection.”); Snyder v. Ridenour,

889 F.2d 1363, 1366

(4th Cir. 1989). Further, the Court need not conduct de novo review when a party “makes general and conclusory objections that do not direct the Court to a specific error in the magistrate’s proposed findings and recommendations.” Orpiano v. Johnson,

687 F.2d 44, 47

(4th Cir. 1982). Objections in this case were due on February 7, 2020. No objections were filed. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R [Doc. 13], GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint [Doc. 8], DISMISSES the Complaint [Doc. 2], and DISMISSES the matter. The Court directs the Clerk to transmit a copy of this Order to any counsel of record and any unrepresented party. ENTERED: March 10, 2020 uli et Bark Ie

Reference

Status
Unknown