Michael Chad Haywood v. United States of America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT BECKLEY MICHAEL CHAD HAYWOOD, Petitioner, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:25-cv-00297 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

ORDER Pending is Petitioner Michael Chad Haywood’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence [ECF 1], filed May 5, 2025.

This action was previously referred to the Honorable Joseph K. Reeder, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation (“PF&R”).

Magistrate Judge Reeder filed his PF&R on March 25, 2026. Magistrate Judge Reeder recommended the Court dismiss the action without prejudice and transfer the action to the Northern District of Alabama as the proper venue for his claim. [ECF 4 at 1].

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, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(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 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also United States v. De Leon- Ramirez, 925 F.3d 177, 181 (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, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (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, 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982). Objections in this case were due on April 13, 2026.

No objections were filed.

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R [ECF 4] and ORDERS this matter to be TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama for further consideration in Case No. 1:21-cr-69-RDP-SGC-1.

The Court directs the Clerk to transmit a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party.

ENTER: April 17, 2026 “tems” Chief United States District Judge