Riggleman v. Beckley Consolidated Legal Center
Filing
6
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court ADOPTS and incorporates the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the 5 Proposed Findings and Recommendation, and ORDERS that the Plaintiff's 4 Motion to Dismiss the Co mplaint be GRANTED, that the Plaintiff's 1 Complaint be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and that this matter be REMOVED from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 10/25/2012. (cc: USMJ VanDervort; attys; any unrepresented party) (msa)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
BECKLEY DIVISION
ELISHA RIGGLEMAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:12-cv-05276
BECKLEY CONSOLIDATED LEGAL
CENTER and JO EVA BEAN,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has reviewed the Plaintiff’s complaint (Document 1) filed on September 10,
2012, as well as his pro-se, letter-form motion to dismiss the complaint (Document 4) filed on
September 20, 2012.
By Standing Order (Document 2) entered on September 10, 2012, this action was referred
to the Honorable R. Clarke VanDervort, 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.
On September 27, 2012, the Magistrate Judge submitted Proposed Findings and
Recommendation (Document 5) wherein it is recommended that this Court grant the Plaintiff’s
motion to dismiss the complaint, dismiss the complaint without prejudice, and remove this action
from the Court’s docket.
Neither party has timely filed objections to the Magistrate Judge=s Proposed Findings and
Recommendation. The Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the
1
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 the Petitioner=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).
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and
recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the Proposed Findings and
Recommendation, and ORDERS that the Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the complaint (Document
4) be GRANTED, that the Plaintiff’s complaint (Document 1) be DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE, and that this matter be REMOVED from the Court’s docket.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Order to Magistrate Judge
VanDervort, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party.
ENTER:
2
October 25, 2012
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?