Gartrell v. Saad
Filing
23
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Signed by Chief Judge Gina M. Groh on 1/10/2019. Copy sent certified mail, return receipt to pro se Petitioner.(tlg)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
MARTINSBURG
ISADORE GARTRELL,
Petitioner,
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:17-CV-159
(GROH)
JENNIFER SAAD, Warden,
Respondent.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Pending before the Court is 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. 21] on December 12, 2018. In his
R&R, Magistrate Judge Trumble recommends that the Petitioner=s § 2241 petition [ECF
No. 1] be denied and dismissed with prejudice.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(C), this Court must conduct a de novo review of
the magistrate judge=s findings where 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 to which no objection is made. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150
(1985). Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and of a
petitioner’s 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 service.
28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
Service was
accepted by the pro se Petitioner on December 17, 2018. ECF No. 22. To date, no
objections have been filed. Accordingly, this Court will review 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. 21] should be, and is hereby,
ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated therein.
Therefore, the
Petitioner’s § 2241 Petition is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Further,
the Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 9] is GRANTED.
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 Petitioner by certified mail, return
receipt requested, at his last known address as reflected on the docket sheet.
DATED: January 10, 2019
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?