IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT BLUEFIELD WAYNE MCPHERSON, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23-00057 R.S. MUTTER, Superintendent Stevens Correctional Center, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER By Standing Order, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cheryl A. Eifert for submission of findings and recommendations regarding disposition pursuant to

(b)(1)(B). Magistrate Judge Eifert submitted to the court her Findings and Recommendation (“PF&R”) on May 9, 2023, in which she recommended that the district court deny plaintiff’s petition under

and motion to waive state court proceedings, grant defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and supplemental motion to dismiss, dismiss the matter without prejudice, and remove this matter from the court’s docket. In accordance with the provisions of

(b), the parties were allotted fourteen days, plus three mailing days, in which to file any objections to Magistrate Judge Eifert’s Findings and Recommendation. The failure of any party to file such objections constitutes a waiver of such party's right to a de novo review by this court. Snyder v. Ridenour,

(4th Cir. 1989). Neither party filed objections within the required time period. Having reviewed the Findings and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Eifert, the court adopts the findings and recommendations contained therein. Accordingly, the court hereby DENIES plaintiff’s petition under

and motion to waive state court proceedings, GRANTS defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and supplemental motion to dismiss, DISMISSES this case without prejudice, and directs the Clerk to

remove this case from the court’s active docket. Additionally, the court has considered whether to grant a certificate of appealability. See

(c). A certificate will not be granted unless there is “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”

(c)(2). The standard is satisfied only upon a showing that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by this court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

(2003); Slack v. McDaniel,

(2000); Rose v. Lee,

(4th Cir. 2001). The court concludes that the governing standard is not satisfied in this instance. Accordingly, the court DENIES a certificate of appealability. 2 The Clerk is directed to forward a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to plaintiff and counsel of record. IT IS SO ORDERED this 18th day of July, 2023. ENTER:

David A. Faber Senior United States District Judge