Pringle v. Attorney General U.S.A.

Filing 23

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting and incorporating the 18 Proposed Findings and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge; denying the 20 Motion by Roger Pringle to stay. Signed by Judge John T. Copenhaver, Jr. on 1/9/2019. (cc: plaintiff; counsel of record; United States Magistrate Judge) (taq)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
AT CHARLESTON
ROGER PRINGLE,
Plaintiff,
v.

Civil Action No. 2:18-cv-00901

ATTORNEY GENERAL, U.S.A.,
Government Office,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The court having received the Proposed Findings and
Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Dwane L.
Tinsley, entered on July 3, 2018; and the magistrate judge
having recommended that the court deny plaintiff Roger Pringle’s
“Motion for ‘Actio’ Damnio Injuria Procedre Torts” and all
subsequent motions for relief in this case; deny the plaintiff’s
Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs; and
dismiss this matter from the docket of the court; and no
objection having been filed to the Proposed Findings and
Recommendation, it is ORDERED that the findings made in the
Proposed Findings and Recommendation of the magistrate judge be,
and they hereby are, adopted by the court and incorporated
herein.

The court further notes the plaintiff’s motion to
stay, filed July 9, 2018.

Inasmuch as it lacks any substantive

ground, it is ORDERED that the plaintiff’s motion to stay be,
and it hereby is, denied.
It is, therefore, ORDERED that this case be, and it
hereby is, dismissed.
The Clerk is directed to forward copies of this
written opinion and order to the plaintiff, all counsel of
record, and the United States Magistrate Judge.
ENTER: January 9, 2019

2