Fleming v. Inmate Marvin Garrett et al
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 Plaintiff's 1 Application to Proceed witho ut Prepayment of Fees or Costs filed be Denied and Plaintiff's 2 Complaint be Dismissed and Removed from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 6/10/2014. (cc: Magistrate Judge VanDervort and any unrepresented party) (cds)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
BECKLEY DIVISION
BILLY JAMES FLEMING,
Plaintiff,
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:14-cv-16419
INMATE MARVN GARRETT, et al.
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has reviewed the Plaintiff=s Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees
and Costs (Document 1) and the Plaintiff’s Complaint (Document 2) filed in this matter on May
14, 2014.
By Standing Order (Document 4) entered on May 15, 2014, 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
May 23, 2014, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation
(Document 5) wherein it is recommended that this Court deny the Plaintiff=s Application to
Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs (Document 1), dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaint
(Document 2), and remove this matter from the Court’s docket. Objections to the Magistrate
Judge=s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by June 9, 2014.
1
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
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 Magistrate Judge
VanDervort counsel of record, and any unrepresented party.
ENTER:
2
June 10, 2014
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?