Mauldin v. Young

Filing 27

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Adopting the 23 Proposed Findings and Recommendation; consolidating civil action 5:17-cv-02312 and 5:17-cv-02626, with 5:17-cv-02312 being the lead case; directing that all further documents be docketed only therein; dismissing all claims for lack of jurisdiction other than Petitioner's claim concerning the calculation and application of his ESGCT; referring this matter back to the Honorable Dwane L. Tinsley, United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S .C. Section 636(b)(1)(B) for consideration of the pleadings and evidence therein and to submit to this court proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition relating to Plaintiff's ESGCT claim. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 4/30/2018. (cc: USMJ Tinsley; attys; any unrepresented party) (msa)

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

ALFRED LEE MAULDIN,
Petitioner,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:17-cv-02312

D. L. YOUNG, Warden, FCI Beckley,
Respondent;
and
ALFRED LEE MAULDIN,
Petitioner,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:17-cv-02626

D. L. YOUNG, Warden, FCI Beckley,
Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On April 12, 2017, in Civil Action 5:17-cv-02312, the Petitioner, proceeding pro se, filed
a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Document 3 therein). By Standing
Order (Document 4) entered on April 13, 2017, the action was referred to the Honorable Dwane
L. Tinsley, 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.

1

Subsequently, on May 1, 2017, in Civil Action 5:17-cv-02626, the Petitioner, proceeding
pro se, filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Document 1 therein).
By Standing Order (Document 3) entered on that date, the action was referred to the Honorable
Dwane L. Tinsley, 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 March 27, 2018, the Magistrate Judge submitted a consolidated Proposed Findings and
Recommendation (Document 25 in Civil Action 5:17-cv-02312; Document 23 in Civil Action
5:17-cv-02626) wherein it is recommended that this Court: consolidate Civil Action 5:17-cv02312 and Civil Action 5:17-cv-02626; dismiss for lack of jurisdiction all claims other than the
Petitioner’s claim concerning the calculation and application of his ESGCT; and leave this matter
referred to the Magistrate Judge for additional proceedings concerning the ESGCT claim.
Objections to the Magistrate Judge=s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due
by April 13, 2018, and none were filed by either party.
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 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. The Court ORDERS that Civil Action 5:17-cv-02312 and Civil Action 5:17cv-02626 be CONSOLIDATED, with Civil Action 5:17-cv-02312 being the lead case, and all
2

further documents to be docketed only therein. The Court further ORDERS that all claims other
than the Petitioner’s claim concerning the calculation and application of his ESGCT, be
DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. Lastly, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), the Court
ORDERS that the matter be referred back to the Honorable Dwane L. Tinsley, United States
Magistrate Judge, who shall consider the pleadings and evidence therein and submit to this Court
proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition relating to the Petitioner’s ESGCT
claim.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Order to Magistrate Judge
Tinsley, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party.
ENTER:

3

April 30, 2018