Elmore v. Blake, Jr.
Elmore v. Blake, Jr.
Trial Court Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
CHARLESTON DIVISION
SAMANTHA MAE ELMORE and ROBERT WILLIAM ELMORE,
Plaintiffs,
v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:24-cv-00068
JUDGE BLAKE, JR. and MEGAN MAYNOR,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On February 9, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed an Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs (Document 1) and their Complaint (Document 2). By Administrative Order (Document 3) entered on February 12, 2024, 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 February 14, 2024, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 4) wherein it is recommended that this Court deny the Plaintiffs’ Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs (Document 1), dismiss the Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Document 2), and remove this matter from the Court’s docket. Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by March 4, 2024. 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, and ORDERS that the Plaintiffs’ Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs (Document 1) be DENIED, the Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Document 2) 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: March 8, 2024 Dike CO. Seageh/ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
Reference
- Status
- Unknown