Monteith v. Shaia et al
Filing
32
ORDER affirming the 31 Memorandum and Recommendation; and granting Defts' 5 , 13 , 16 , 22 & 24 Motions to Dismiss, without prejudice, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Signed by District Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr. on 5/23/17. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.) (ejb) Modified text on 5/24/2017 NEF Regenerated. (ejb)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. 1:16-cv-00394-MOC-DLH
ERIC MONTEITH,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
REBECCA SHAIA, et al.
Defendants.
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the court on review of a Memorandum and Recommendation
(#31) issued in this matter. In the Memorandum and Recommendation, the magistrate judge
advised the parties of the right to file objections within 14 days, all in accordance with 28, United
States Code, Section 636(b)(1)(c). No objections have been filed within the time allowed.
The Federal Magistrates Act of 1979, as amended, provides that “a district court shall make
a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specific proposed findings or
recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d
198, 200 (4th Cir.1983). However, “when objections to strictly legal issues are raised and no
factual issues are challenged, de novo review of the record may be dispensed with.” Orpiano v.
Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982). Similarly, de novo review is not required by the statute
“when a party makes general or conclusory objections that do not direct the court to a specific
error in the magistrate judge’s proposed findings and recommendations.” Id. Moreover, the statute
does not on its face require any review at all of issues that are not the subject of an objection.
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d at 200. Nonetheless, a district
judge is responsible for the final determination and outcome of the case, and accordingly the court
1
has conducted a careful review of the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
After such careful review, the court determines that the recommendation of the magistrate
judge is fully consistent with and supported by current law. Further, the brief factual background
and recitation of issues is supported by the applicable pleadings. Based on such determinations,
the court will fully affirm the Memorandum and Recommendation and grant relief in accordance
therewith.
ORDER
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Memorandum and Recommendation (#31) is
AFFIRMED, defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (#5, #13, # 16, # 22, #24) are GRANTED,
and this action is DISMISSED, without prejudice, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Signed: May 23, 2017
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?