Slonaker v. Jividin

District Court, S.D. West Virginia

Slonaker v. Jividin

Trial Court Opinion

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

CHARLESTON DIVISION

DANIEL F. SLONAKER,

Plaintiff,

v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:21-cv-00036

BETSY JIVIDIN, et al.,

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

On January 14, 2021, the Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed his Complaint (Document 3) in this matter. The Plaintiff has also filed three applications to proceed with prepayment of fees and costs (Documents 1, 6 & 8). By Administrative Order (Document 4) entered on January 15, 2021, this action was referred to the Honorable Omar J. Aboulhosn, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission to this Court of proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition, pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636

. On January 19, 2022, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 14) wherein it is recommended that this Court deny the Plaintiff’s applications to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs (Documents 1 & 6), dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaint (Document 3), and remove this matter from the Court’s docket. Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by February 7, 2022. 1 Neither party has timely filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Proposed Findings and Recommendation. 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,

474 U.S. 140, 150

(1985). Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and a party’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). Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the Proposed Findings and Recommendation. The Court further ORDERS that the Plaintiffs applications to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs (Documents 1, 6 & 8) be DENIED, the Plaintiff's Complaint (Document 3) be DISMISSED, and this matter be REMOVED from the Court’s docket. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Order to Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party. ENTER: February 17, 2022 Dire. Benger’ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

Reference

Status
Unknown