McGurgan v. Macia

Filing 13

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER directing that the Court ADOPTS the 11 Proposed Findings and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge; the Plaintiff's 1 Complaint be DISMISSED; this case be REMOVED from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 4/27/2020. (cc: Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn; attys; any unrepresented party) (btm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
CHARLESTON DIVISION
WILLIAM MCGURGAN,
v.

Plaintiff,

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20-cv-00140

OFFICER R. K. MARKS, et al.,
Defendants.

WILLIAM MCGURGAN,
v.
MRS. LEAH MACIA,

Plaintiff,

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20-cv-00144

Defendant.

WILLIAM M. MCGURGAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
MISS LEAH MACIA,

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20-cv-00157

Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

On February 19, 2020, in Case 2:20-cv-140, the Plaintiff filed an Application to Proceed
Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs (Document 1) and a Complaint (Document 2). On
February 21, 2020, in Case 2:20-cv-144, he filed an Application to Proceed Without Prepayment
of Fees and Costs (Document 1) and a Complaint (Document 2). On February 28, 2020, in Case
2:20-cv-157, he filed a Complaint (Document 1). The Plaintiff is pro se.

1

By Administrative Order (Document 3) entered on February 20, 2020, Case 2:20-cv-140
was referred to the Honorable Omar J. Aboulhosn, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission
to this Court of proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition, pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636. By Administrative Order (Document 9) in Case 2:20-cv-144 and Administrative
Order (Document 10) in Case 2:20-cv-157, entered on March 27, 2020, those respective cases
were, likewise, referred to Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn for submission of proposed findings of
fact and recommendation for disposition.
On March 31, 2020, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and
Recommendation (Document 8 in 2:20-cv-140; Document 10 in 2:20-cv-144; and Document 11
in 2:20-cv-157). Therein, it is recommended that this Court deny the Plaintiff’s Applications to
Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs, dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaints, and remove
these matters from the Court’s docket. Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Proposed Findings
and Recommendation were due by April 17, 2020. Neither party had filed objections as of the
date of this order.
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).
Therefore, the Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings of the Magistrate
Judge as contained in the Proposed Findings and Recommendation, and ORDERS as follows:
1)

The Plaintiff’s Applications to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs
(Document 1 in 2:20-cv-140; and Document 1 in 2:20-cv-144) be DENIED;
2

2)

The Plaintiff’s Complaints (Document 2 in 2:20-cv-140, Document 2 in 2:20-cv144, and Document 1 in 2:20-cv-157), be DISMISSED; and

3)

Case Nos. 2:20-cv-140, 2:20-cv-144 and 2:20-cv-157 be REMOVED from the
Court’s docket.

The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Order to Magistrate Judge
Aboulhosn, to counsel of record, and to any unrepresented party.
ENTER:

3

April 27, 2020