IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA Wheeling

LEONARD E. SMITH, Petitioner, V. Civil Action No. 5:22-CV-247 Judge Bailey WARDEN BAYLESS, Respondent.

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION The above referenced case is before this Court upon the magistrate judge’s recommendation that the petition [Doc. 1] be denied and the case be dismissed without prejudice. This Courtis charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate judge's report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report.

(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn,

(1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge’s report pursuant to

(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United States v. Schronce,

(4th Cir, 1984), cert. denied,

(1984). No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation within the prescribed time frame. Accordingly, a review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge’s report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Therefore, the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation is AFFIRMED, the petition [Doc. 1] is DENIED, and this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. It is so ORDERED. The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this Order to petitioner and to transmit copies to all counsel of record herein. DATED: November @ 4 2022.

JOHNPRESTONBAILEY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE