Harris v. Armel et al
Filing
33
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Signed by Chief Judge Gina M. Groh on 6/4/2019. Copy sent certified mail, return receipt to pro se Plaintiff. (tlg)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
MARTINSBURG
NAKIE ALTOVISE HARRIS,
Plaintiff,
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:18-CV-94
(GROH)
AMY ARMEL, and M. GREENE,
Defendants.
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. 31] on May 8, 2019. In his R&R,
Magistrate Judge Trumble recommends that the Plaintiff’s complaint [ECF No. 1] be
dismissed with prejudice as to Defendant Armel and without prejudice as to Defendant
Greene.
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 plaintiff’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). The R&R was mailed to
the Plaintiff on May 8, 2019. ECF No. 6. The Plaintiff accepted service on May 13,
2019. ECF No. 32. To date, no objections have been filed. Accordingly, the 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. 31] should be, and is hereby,
ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated therein.
Therefore, the
Plaintiff’s Complaint [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as to Defendant
Armel and WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to Defendant Greene. The Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss [ECF No. 27] 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 Plaintiff by certified mail, return
receipt requested, at his last known address as reflected on the docket sheet.
DATED: June 4, 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?