IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA Wheeling

GULED MOHAMED, Petitioner, v. CIV. ACT. NO. 5:24-CV-138 Judge Bailey WARDEN, USP HAZELTON, Respondent. ORDER The above-referenced case is before this Court upon the magistrate judge’s recommendation that the respondent’s Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 12] be granted and the Petition [Doc. 1] be denied and dismissed with prejudice. [Doc. 21 at 7]. This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate judge’s report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report.

(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn,

(1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge’s report pursuant to

(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United States v. Schronce,

(4th Cir. 1984), cert. denied,

(1984). No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. A de novo review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge’s report

accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation [Doc. 21] is ADOPTED. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 12] is GRANTED, the Petition [Doc. 1] is DENIED and this matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk is DIRECTED TO STRIKE the above-styled case from the active docket of this Court. It is so ORDERED. The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to any counsel of record herein and to the pro se petitioner. DATED: January 10, 2025.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

.