Mabry v. Jividen

District Court, S.D. West Virginia

Mabry v. Jividen

Trial Court Opinion

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

CHARLESTON DIVISION

DAVID L. MABRY,

Plaintiff,

v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:19-cv-00424

BETSY JIVIDEN, et al.,

Defendants.

DISMISSAL ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff David Mabry’s (“Plaintiff”) Complaint. (ECF No. 4.) By Standing Order entered in this case on May 31, 2019, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Court Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation for disposition (“PF&R”). Magistrate Judge Tinsley filed his PF&R on May 3, 2022, recommending that this Court dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 8.) 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 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.

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). Objections to the PF&R were due on May 20, 2022. (See ECF No. 8.) To date, Plaintiff has failed to submit any objection in response to the PF&R, thus constituting a waiver of de novo review and Plaintiffs right to appeal this Court’s order. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R, (ECF No. 8), and DISMISSES this action WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Clerk is further DIRECTED to remove this action from the Court’s active 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: June 13, 2022

THOMAS E. J STON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Reference

Status
Unknown