Muse v. Entzel

Filing 26

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Signed by Chief Judge Gina M. Groh on 04/26/2021. (cwm) Copy mailed to pro se petitioner by CMRR.

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA MARTINSBURG ALBERTIS L. MUSE, Petitioner, v. CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:19-CV-93 (GROH) PAUL ADAMS, Warden, Respondent. ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Now before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“R&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. 23] on February 22, 2021. Therein, Magistrate Judge Trumble recommends that the Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss be granted and 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). The R&R was mailed to the Petitioner by certified mail on February 22, 2021. ECF No. 23. The Petitioner accepted service on February 26, 2021. To date, no objections have been filed. Accordingly, this Court reviews the R&R for clear error. Upon careful review and thoughtful consideration, it is the opinion of this Court that Magistrate Judge Trumble’s R&R [ECF No. 23] should be, and is hereby, ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated therein. Therefore, the Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED [ECF No. 17] and 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 pro se Petitioner by certified mail, return receipt requested, at his last known address as reflected on the docket sheet. DATED: April 26, 2021 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?