From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Baxter v. United States

United States District Court, Southern District of West Virginia
Mar 8, 2023
Civil Action 2:22-cv-00490 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 8, 2023)

Opinion

Civil Action 2:22-cv-00490

03-08-2023

ARTHUR ANTHONY BAXTER, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Defendants.


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

IRENE C. BERGER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On October 27, 2022, the Petitioner, proceeding pro se, filed his Petition for a Writ of Specific Performance pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 7 and 42. (Document 1.)

By Standing Order (Document 2) entered on October 28, 2022, 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 February 16, 2023, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 4) wherein it is recommended that this Court dismiss the Petition for a Writ of Specific Performance (Document 1) without prejudice. Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due no later than March 6, 2023.

No 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 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, and ORDERS that the Petition for a Writ of Specific Performance (Document 1) be DISMISSED without prejudice. The Court further ORDERS that 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 Tinsley, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party.


Summaries of

Baxter v. United States

United States District Court, Southern District of West Virginia
Mar 8, 2023
Civil Action 2:22-cv-00490 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 8, 2023)
Case details for

Baxter v. United States

Case Details

Full title:ARTHUR ANTHONY BAXTER, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and INTERNAL…

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of West Virginia

Date published: Mar 8, 2023

Citations

Civil Action 2:22-cv-00490 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 8, 2023)

Citing Cases

Ballance v. Rettig

These laws do not provide for a private cause of action for individuals to collect the payments that these…