Gibson v. South Central Regional Jail
Gibson v. South Central Regional Jail
Trial Court Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
CHARLESTON DIVISION
ADAM GIBSON,
Plaintiff,
v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:19-cv-00914
SOUTH CENTRAL REGIONAL JAIL,
Defendant.
ORDER
By standing order entered on January 4, 2016, and filed in this case on January 2, 2020, (ECF No. 3), this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation for disposition (“PF&R”). Magistrate Judge Tinsley filed his PF&R on March 9, 2021, recommending this Court dismiss this matter for either failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted or for failure to prosecute. (ECF No. 4 at 3.) This 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 PF&R 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 Plaintiff’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). In addition, this Court need not conduct a de novo 1 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 to the PF&R in this case were due on March 26, 2021. (ECF No.4.) To date, Plaintiff has failed to submit any objection in response to the PF&R, thus constituting a waiver of de novo review and Plaintiff's right to appeal this Court’s order. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R, (ECF No. 4), and DISMISSES this action WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute. Further, Plaintiff's Application to Proceed Without Payment of Fees and Costs, (ECF No. 1), is DENIED AS MOOT. The Court further DIRECTS the Clerk to remove this matter from the Court’s docket. IT IS SO ORDERED. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party. ENTER: March 30, 2021
&
Reference
- Status
- Unknown