Jackson v. Beckley Department of Motor Vehicles

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the 4 Proposed Findings and Recommendation, and ORDERS that the Plaintiff's 1 Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs be DENIED, the Plaintiff's 2 Complaint be DISMISSED, and this matter be REMOVED from the Courts docket. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 01/06/2016. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (msa)

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

JAMES JACKSON, III,
Plaintiff,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:14-cv-09173

THE BECKLEY DEPARTMENT OF
MOTOR VEHICLES,
Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

On February 10, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an Application to Proceed Without Prepayment
of Fees and Costs (Document 1) and his Complaint (Document 2). By Standing Order (Document
3) entered on that date, 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 December 17, 2015, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and
Recommendation (Document 4) wherein it is recommended that this Court deny the Application
to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs, dismiss the Complaint, and remove this matter
from the Court’s docket.

Objections to the Magistrate Judge=s Proposed Findings and

Recommendation were due by January 4, 2016, and none were filed by either party1.

The docket reflects that the Proposed Findings and Recommendation mailed to the Plaintiff was
returned as undeliverable on December 21, 2015.
1

1

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).
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 1) be DENIED, the Plaintiff’s Complaint (Document 2) 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 counsel of record,
and any unrepresented party.
ENTER:

2

January 6, 2016