Glenn v. United States of America

Filing 872

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting 865 Proposed Findings and Recommendations; granting 864 MOTION to Withdraw by Keith I. Glenn dismissing 789 MOTION to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (2255) by Keith I. Glenn; directing the Clerk to remove this case from the docket of the Court. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 5/24/2017. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (tmr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
CHARLESTON DIVISION

KEITH I. GLENN,
Petitioner,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16-cv-01369
(Criminal No. 2:13-cr-00091-5)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is Petitioner Keith I. Glenn’s Motion to Withdraw Motion Under
Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (ECF No. 864.) On February 9, 2016, this action was referred to United
States Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn for submission of proposed findings of fact and
recommendations for disposition (“PF&R”). (ECF No. 791.) Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn filed
his PF&R on April 19, 2017, recommending that this Court grant the pending motion and dismiss
Petitioner’s § 2255 motion. (ECF No. 865.)
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 a party’s right to appeal this Court’s
Order. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also 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 the PF&R in this case were due on May 8, 2017. To date, no objections
have been filed. 1 The Court therefore ADOPTS the PF&R, (ECF No. 865), GRANTS the
Motion to Withdraw Motion Under Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255, (ECF No. 864), and DISMISSES
Petitioner’s § 2255 motion, (ECF No. 789). The Court further DIRECTS the Clerk to remove
this case from the docket of the Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any
unrepresented party.
ENTER:

1

May 24, 2017

The Court notes that Petitioner filed a subsequent motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 on May 5, 2017. (No. 2:17-cv2740, ECF No. 867.) While the motion was filed within the objections period, it does not contest anything in the
PF&R. The motion was docketed as a new habeas case, and it mentions that there was a pending petition in front of
this Court that was voluntarily withdrawn on April 20, 2017. (See id. at 1.) This is further evidence that Petitioner
did not intend for his new motion to be understood as objecting to Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn’s PF&R. Thus, the
Court will not construe it as such.