Williams v. Ali et al

Filing 34

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 32 AND DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk is directed to enter a separate judgment order. Signed by District Judge Irene M. Keeley on 7/18/2017. (kd)(Copy pro se party/cmrrr) (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/18/2017: # 1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (kd).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
LINWOOD RUDOLPH WILLIAMS
Plaintiff,
v.

//

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17CV11
(Judge Keeley)

ZACHERIA ALI and
GANGSTER CHRONICLE WORLD WIDE, LLC,
Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
[DKT. NO. 32] AND DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE
On January 20, 2017, the pro se plaintiff, Linwood Rudolph
Williams (“Williams”), filed a complaint against the defendants,
Zacheria Ali and Gangster Chronicle World Wide, LLC, alleging that
they had breached the parties’ publishing contract (Dkt. No. 1).
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the local rules, the Court referred
the case to the Honorable Michael J. Aloi, United States Magistrate
Judge, on January 27, 2017 (Dkt. No. 4).
On February 2, 2017, Magistrate Judge Aloi granted Williams’s
motion to proceed in forma pauperis, directed the Clerk to issue
summonses, and directed the United States Marshals Service (“USMS”)
to serve process pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c) (Dkt. No. 7).
After the USMS made several failed attempts to serve process at the
address Williams provided, on June 1, 2017, Magistrate Judge Aloi
directed Williams to show good cause why he had failed to effect
service within the 90-day period required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m)
(Dkt. No. 29). In response, Williams explained that he, as a

WILLIAMS V. ALI, ET AL.

1:17CV11

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
[DKT. NO. 32] AND DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE
federal prisoner, had limited resources and means of communication,
had provided the last known address for the defendants, and had
made his own attempts to serve the defendants “via email and U.S.
Postal Service.” Williams further requested a 90-day extension of
time in which to effect service (Dkt. No. 31).
On June 23, 2017, Magistrate Judge Aloi denied Williams’s
motion

for

an

Recommendation

extension
(“R&R”),

of

time

recommending

and

filed

that

the

a

Report

Court

and

dismiss

Williams’s complaint without prejudice for failure to serve (Dkt.
No. 32). Acknowledging that Williams had undertaken some good faith
efforts to effect service, the R&R nonetheless reasoned that he had
failed to demonstrate good cause based solely on his “limited
resources

and

public

means

for

communication.”

The

R&R

also

informed Williams of his right to file any objections to the
recommendations within 14 days following his receipt of the R&R.
Id. at 3. Although he received the R&R on June 27, 2017, Williams
has not filed any objections (Dkt. No. 33).
This Court is required to review de novo only those portions
of the magistrate judge’s findings to which specific objection is
made. Dellarcirprete v. Gutierrez, 479 F. Supp. 2d 600, 603-04
(N.D.W. Va. 2007) (citing Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th
Cir. 1983)). “[T]he Court may adopt, without explanation, any of
the magistrate judge’s recommendations to which the prisoner does
2

WILLIAMS V. ALI, ET AL.

1:17CV11

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
[DKT. NO. 32] AND DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE
not object.” Id. at 604 (citing Camby, 718 F.2d at 199). Because
Williams has not filed any objections, the Court’s review of the
R&R is for clear error.
After reviewing the R&R and the record, the Court adopts the
opinion of the Magistrate Judge for the reasons discussed in the
R&R (Dkt. No. 32). It therefore:
1.

ADOPTS the R&R (Dkt. No. 32); and

2.

DISMISSES this case WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to transmit a copy of this Order to the
pro se plaintiff by certified mail, return receipt requested, and
to enter a separate judgment order.
Dated: July 18, 2017.
/s/ Irene M. Keeley
IRENE M. KEELEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3