Halvorson v. Raleigh General Hospital

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER : the Court Adopts and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the 7 Proposed Findings and Recommendations and Orders that the Plaintiff's 3 Application to Proceed without Prepayment of Fees or Costs be denied; the Plaintiff's 1 Complaint be dismissed and this matter be removed from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 8/27/2013. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (cds)

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

PEDER HALVORSON,
Plaintiff,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:12-cv-05431

RALEIGH GENERAL HOSPITAL,
Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

The Court has reviewed the Plaintiff=s September 14, 2012 Complaint (Document 1) and
Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs (Document 3).
By Standing Order (Document 2) entered on September 14, 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 August 7, 2013, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and

Recommendation (Document 7) wherein it is recommended that this Court deny the Plaintiff’s
Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs (Document 3); dismiss the
Plaintiff’s Complaint (Document 1); and remove this matter from the Court’s docket. Objections
to the Magistrate Judge=s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by August 26, 2013.
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 Application to Proceed Without Prepayment
of Fees and Costs (Document 3) be DENIED; the Plaintiff’s Complaint (Document 1) be
DISMISSED; and 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

August 27, 2013