Foster v. Kanawha-Charleston Housing Authority
Foster v. Kanawha-Charleston Housing Authority
Trial Court Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
CHARLESTON DIVISION
CARL C. FOSTER,
Plaintiff,
v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20-cv-00708
KANAWHA-CHARLESTON HOUSING AUTHORITY, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Complaint. (ECF No. 2.) By standing order entered on January 4, 2016, and filed in this case on October 27, 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 entered his PF&R on February 11, 2021, recommending this Court dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint for failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 9.) This Court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, factual or legal conclusions contained within the PF&R to which no specific objections were 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 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). 1 Objections to the PF&R in this case were due on March 1, 2021. (See ECF No. 9.) While Plaintiff filed a document titled “Objection” prior to March 1, 2021—the contents of this filing do not raise any specific objections to the PF&R. (ECF No. 10.) Thus, the Court need not conduct a de novo review of these objections as they do not direct the Court to a specific error in the PF&R. See Orpiano,
687 F.2d at 47. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R, (ECF No. 9), and DISMISSES Plaintiff's Complaint, (ECF No. 2), for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The Clerk is DIRECTED to REMOVE this case from the active docket of the Court. IT ISSO ORDERED. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party. ENTER: September 29, 2021
&
Reference
- Status
- Unknown