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

CHARLESTON DIVISION

TIMOTHY CHARLTON, Petitioner,

v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-cv-00743

SHAWN STRAUGHN, Respondent.

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Respondent Shawn Straughn’s Motion to Dismiss the Petitioner’s § 2254 Petition. (ECF No. 16.) By Standing Order, this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Omar J. Aboulhosn for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation for disposition (“PF&R”). (ECF No. 6.) On October 21, 2024, Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn filed his PF&R recommending that this Court grant Respondent’s motion to dismiss because the petition was untimely. (ECF No. 24.) This Court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, factual or legal conclusions contained within the PF&R to which no objections were addressed. Thomas v. Arn,

(1985). Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and Plaintiff’s right to appeal this Court’s order.

(b)(1); see also Snyder v. Ridenour,

(4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce,

(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,

(4th Cir. 1982). Objections to the PF&R in this case were due on November 7, 2024. (ECF No. 24.) To date, Petitioner has not filed any objections, thereby waiving de novo review of Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn’s PF&R. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R, (id.), and DISMISSES the action WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 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: February 24, 2025

Ma, □□ THOMAS E. JOHNSTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE