Schoonover v. Family Dollar Stores of West Virginia, LLC

District Court, S.D. West Virginia

Schoonover v. Family Dollar Stores of West Virginia, LLC

Trial Court Opinion

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

CHARLESTON DIVISION

JAMES RANDY SCHOONOVER, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:24-cv-00744

FAMILY DOLLAR STORES INC.,

Defendant.

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 4.) By Standing Order entered in this case on December 31, 2024, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation for disposition (“PF&R”). (ECF No. 3.) Magistrate Judge Tinsley filed his PF&R on March 7, 2025, recommending that this Court grant the motion and dismiss this case for failure to state a claim for relief and for failure to prosecute. (ECF No. 9.) This 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.

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). 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,

687 F.2d 44, 47

(4th Cir. 1982). Objections to the PF&R were due on March 24,2025. (ECF No. 9.) To date, no objections have been filed. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R, (id.), GRANTS Defendant’s motion to dismiss, (ECF No. 4), and DISMISSES this action WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim for relief pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and failure to prosecute pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court Further DIRECTS the Clerk to remove this matter from the Court’s docket. 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: April 18, 2025

THOMAS E. J STON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Reference

Status
Unknown