Sellers v. St. Joseph Hospital et al

Filing 35

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Signed by Chief Judge Gina M. Groh on 10/11/2017. Copy sent certified mail, return receipt to pro se Plaintiff.(tlg) (Additional attachment(s) added on 10/11/2017: # 1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (tlg).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
MARTINSBURG
FREDERICK SELLERS,
Plaintiff,

v.

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:15-CV-121
(GROH)

ST. JOSEPH HOSPITAL and
SALVATOR LANSANA, MD,
Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On this day, the above-styled matter came before the Court for consideration of
the Report and Recommendation (AR&R@) of United States Magistrate Judge Robert W.
Trumble. Pursuant to this Court’s Local Rules, this action was referred to Magistrate
Judge Trumble for submission of a proposed R&R. Magistrate Judge Trumble issued
his R&R [ECF No. 32] on June 28, 2017.

In the R&R, he recommends that the

Defendant=s complaint [ECF No. 1] be dismissed without prejudice. Pursuant to 28
U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(C), this Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions
of the magistrate judge=s findings to which objection is made. However, the Court is not
required to 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. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Failure to file
timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and of a Plaintiffs right to appeal
this Court’s Order. 28.U.S.C..'.636(b)(1); Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th

Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984).
Objections to Magistrate Judge Trumble=s R&R were due within fourteen plus three
days of the Plaintiff being served with a copy of the same. 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1); Fed.
R. Civ. P. 72(b). Service was accepted by the pro se Plaintiff on July 5, 2017. ECF No.
33. On July 14, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a response to Magistrate Judge Trumble’s R&R.
Therein, the Plaintiff does not make any objections to the R&R, but instead, he simply
asks this Court to return his $350 filing fee.

That request shall be addressed in a

forthcoming Order. Accordingly, this Court reviewed the R&R for clear error.
Upon careful review of the R&R, it is the opinion of this Court that Magistrate Judge
Trumble=s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 32] should be, and is hereby,
ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated therein.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff=s Complaint [ECF.No. 1] is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE. This matter is ORDERED STRICKEN from the Court’s active docket.
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to mail a copy of this Order to the Plaintiff by
certified mail, return receipt requested, at his last known address as reflected on the
docket sheet.

DATED: October 11, 2017

2