Smith v. United States

Filing 33

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court ADOPTS the 32 Proposed Findings and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge, and ORDERS that the Defendants' 21 Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment, be GRANTED, the Plaintiff's 1 Complaint be DISMISSED, and this matter be REMOVED from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 2/11/2016. (cc: Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn; attys; any unrepresented party) (slr)

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

DONALD T. SMITH,
Plaintiff,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:15-cv-03472

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,
Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

On March 23, 2015, the Plaintiff filed his Complaint (Document 1) in this matter.
Subsequently, on June 15, 2015, the United States filed the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, or in
the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment (Document 21).
By Orders entered on March 23, 2015, and January 6, 2016 (Documents 2 and 30), this
action 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.
On January 19, 2016, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and
Recommendation (Document 32) wherein it is recommended that this Court grant the Defendants’
Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment, dismiss the Plaintiff’s
Complaint, and remove this matter from the Court’s docket. Objections to the Magistrate Judge=s
Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by February 5, 2016.
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 Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative,
Motion for Summary Judgment (Document 21) be GRANTED, 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
Aboulhosn, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party.
ENTER:

2

February 11, 2016