Turner v. Saad

Filing 21

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Signed by Chief Judge Gina M. Groh on 1/6/2020. Copy sent certified mail, return receipt to pro se Petitioner.(tlg) (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/6/2020: # 1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (tlg).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
MARTINSBURG
RUSSELL GARNET TURNER,
Petitioner,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:18-CV-58
(GROH)

JENNIFER SAAD,
Respondent.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Now 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. 18] on December 5, 2019. Therein,
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). As instructed, The Clerk
of Court mailed a copy of the R&R, return receipt requested, to the pro se Petitioner at
his last known address as reflected on the docket sheet, which was FCI Gilmer in
Glenville, West Virginia. ECF No. 19. To date, service has not been accepted because
the pro se Petitioner was released from federal custody on August 8, 2019.1 Thus, no
objections have been filed.

Due to these circumstances, this Court no longer has

jurisdiction over this matter.
Upon careful review of the R&R, it is the opinion of this Court that Magistrate Judge
Trumble=s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 18] should be, and is hereby,
ORDERED ADOPTED because the pro se Petitioner is no longer in federal custody.
Therefore, the Petitioner’s § 2241 Petition [ECF No. 1] is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH
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 Petitioner by certified mail, return
receipt requested, at his last known address as reflected on the docket sheet.
DATED: January 6, 2020

1

The Federal Bureau of Prisons Inmate Locator (https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/) was used to determine
the pro se Petitioner’s release date.

2