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

KENNETH MOBLEY,

Petitioner,

v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:25-00206

FBOP-MCDOWELL,

Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

By Standing Order, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Joseph K. Reeder for submission of proposed findings and recommendation (“PF&R”). Magistrate Judge Reeder submitted his proposed findings and recommendation on November 4, 2025. In that Proposed Findings and Recommendation, the magistrate judge recommended that this court deny (for a second time) petitioner’s motion for a preliminary injunction and restraining order. In accordance with the provisions of

(b), the parties were allotted fourteen days, plus three mailing days, in which to file any objections to Magistrate Judge Reeder’s Findings and Recommendation. The failure of any party to file such objections constitutes a waiver of such party's right to a de novo review by this court. Snyder v. Ridenour,

(4th Cir. 1989); Thomas v. Arn,

(1985). Moreover, 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). No objections to the PF&R were filed. Having reviewed the Findings and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Reeder, the court adopts the findings and recommendations contained in the PF&R. Accordingly, the court DENIES petitioner’s motion for a preliminary injunction and restraining order and refers the matter back to Magistrate Judge Reeder for further proceedings. The Clerk is directed to forward copies of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to all counsel of record and to any unrepresented party. It is SO ORDERED this 29th day of December, 2025. BNTER: Rautd A Dols David A. Faber Senior United States District Judge

—?-—