Richmond v. Raleigh County West Virginia

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court ADOPTS the 4 Proposed Findings and Recommendations by Magistrate Judge, and ORDERS that the 1 Application to Proceed without Prepayment of Fees or Costs filed by Eddie Richmond be DENIED, the Plaintiff's 2 Civil Complaint be DISMISSED, and this matter REMOVED from the Court's docket. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 10/16/2019. (cc: Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn; attys; any unrepresented party) (slr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
BECKLEY DIVISION
EDDIE RICMOND,
Plaintiff,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:16-cv-10846

RALEIGH COUNTY WEST VIRGINIA,
Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On November 14, 2016, the Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed an Application to Proceed
Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs (Document 1) and a Civil Complaint (Document 2). By
Standing Order (Document 3) entered on that date, the matter 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 September 19, 2019, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and
Recommendation (Document 4) wherein it is recommended that this Court deny the Plaintiff’s
Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs, dismiss the Plaintiff’s Civil
Complaint, and remove this matter from the Court’s docket. Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s
Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by October 7, 20191.

The docket reflects that the Proposed Findings and Recommendation mailed to the Plaintiff was
returned as undeliverable and re-mailed to a different address on October 4, 2019. As of October
16, 2019, no objections had been filed.
1
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 Civil 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
Aboulhosn, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party.
ENTER:

2

October 16, 2019