DEVEAU v. YORK COUNTY JAIL et al

Filing 7

ORDER adopting 5 Report and Recommended Decision for 1 Complaint filed by ZACHARY DAVID DEVEAU, dismissing 1 Complaint. By JUDGE JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR. (MFS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
ZACHARY DAVID DEVEAU,
Plaintiff,
v.
YORK COUNTY JAIL, et als.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

2:14-cv-00444-JAW

ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION
On November 7, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued an order indicating that
Mr. Deveau’s Complaint against the York County Jail and its administrator was
subject to dismissal for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, but
giving Mr. Deveau time to file an amended complaint with additional facts. Order at
1-2 (ECF No. 4). Mr. Deveau did not respond to that Order.
On December 9, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued a recommended decision
based on the allegations in the originally-filed Complaint and in that recommended
decision, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court dismiss Zachary David
Deveau’s Complaint against the York County Jail and the York County Jail
Administrator.

Recommended Decision (ECF No. 5).

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(B), Mr. Deveau was required to file any objection to the recommended
decision within fourteen days after having been served with a copy thereof, and
failure to file a timely objection constitutes a waiver of the right to de novo review by
the district court and to appeal the district court’s order.

On December 9, 2014, the Clerk’s Office mailed Mr. Deveau a copy of the
recommended decision to the Limerick, Maine address listed in his Complaint and
the Clerk’s Office set the matter ahead until December 30, 2014 for any objection.
The December 30, 2014 deadline passed but Mr. Deveau failed to file an objection.
Concerned that Mr. Deveau may have used his Limerick, Maine address even though
he was still incarcerated in York County Jail, the Court ordered the Clerk’s Office to
mail a copy of the recommended decision to Mr. Deveau in care of the York County
Jail. Mr. Deveau has failed to answer any correspondence from the Court since
November, 2014.
The Court has reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge’s recommended
decision together with the entire record and has made a de novo determination of all
matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge’s recommended decision. The Court
concurs with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendations and determines no further
proceeding is necessary. Accordingly, upon de novo review and absent any objection
from the Plaintiff, the Court AFFIRMS the recommended decision of the Magistrate
Judge and DISMISSES the Complaint (ECF No. 1).
SO ORDERED.
/s/ John A. Woodcock, Jr.
JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 3rd day of February, 2015

2