UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT BECKLEY TERRENCE MORGAN, Petitioner,

v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:22-cv-00102 K. HECKARD, Warden, Respondent. ORDER Pending is Petitioner Terrence Morgan’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to

[Doc. 1], filed February 28, 2022. This action was previously referred to the Honorable Omar J. Aboulhosn, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation (“PF&R”). Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn filed his PF&R on May 29, 2024. Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn recommended that the Court dismiss Mr. Morgan’s Petition

for Writ of Habeas Corpus and remove this matter from the Court’s docket. The Court need not 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. See Thomas v. Arn,

(1985); see also

(b)(1) (“A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” (emphasis added)). Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the Petitioner’s right to appeal the Court’s order. See

(b)(1); see also United States v. De Leon- Ramirez,

(4th Cir. 2019) (Parties may not typically “appeal a magistrate judge’s findings that were not objected to below, as § 636(b) doesn’t require de novo review absent objection.”); Snyder v. Ridenour,

(4th Cir. 1989). Further, the Court need not conduct 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,

(4th Cir. 1982). Objections in this case were due on August 5, 2024. No objections were filed. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R [Doc. 4], DISMISSES Mr. Morgan’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to

[Doc. 1], and DISMISSES the matter. The Court directs the Clerk to transmit a copy of this Order to any counsel of record and any unrepresented party. ENTER: August 6, 2024

ao A Frank W. Volk Gres”: United States District Judge

' The Court notes the PF&R was served on Petitioner by mail and initially returned as undeliverable. The PF&R was then re-mailed to Petitioner at RRM, Residential Reentry Office, 1000 Liberty Avenue, Suite 1315, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 15222, on July 17, 2024. [Doc. 5]. “A party who represents himself or herself shall file with the clerk his or her complete name and address where pleadings, notices, orders, and other papers may be served on him or her... A pro se party must advise the clerk promptly of any changes in... address... .” S.D. W. Va. LR Civ P 83.5.