Opinion
Civil Action 1:22-CV-107
07-19-2024
CHARLES RAY AUGMON, III, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, and A. CATHER Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, RECOMMENDING THAT ACTION BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO SHOW CAUSE
Michael John Aloi, United States District Judge
On October 18, 2022, pro se Plaintiff filed a Complaint to initiate this action against Defendants State of West Virginia and A. Cather. [ECF No. 1]. By Order dated October 18, 2022 [ECF No. 4], the Hon. Thomas S. Kleeh, United States District Judge, referred this matter to the undersigned Magistrate Judge to review the record and issue written orders or reports and recommendations, as appropriate. The Court adopted the undersigned's Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 6], dismissed Count Three without prejudice, and found that the case should proceed in the normal course. [ECF No. 8].
By an Order to Show Cause dated June 3, 2024, [ECF No. 10], the undersigned ordered Plaintiff to show cause, within fourteen (14) days of that Order, as to why the remaining claims should not be dismissed for failure to effect service of process or otherwise pursue the claims. Per the United States Postal Service tracking website, Plaintiff had until June 25, 2024 to collect the Court's Order [ECF No. 10] or it would be returned. To date, it appears Plaintiff has failed to do so.
Accordingly, because Plaintiff failed to comply with the above-noted Order in a timely manner, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that the remaining claims of the Complaint [ECF No. 1] be DISMISSED without prejudice.
Any party shall have fourteen (14) days from the date of service of this Report and Recommendation to file with the Clerk of the Court specific written objections identifying the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objection is made, and the basis for such objection. A copy of such objections should also be submitted to the presiding United States District Judge. Objections shall not exceed ten (10) typewritten pages or twenty (20) handwritten pages, including exhibits, unless accompanied by a motion for leave to exceed the page limitations, consistent with LR PL P 12.
Failure to timely file written objections to the Report and Recommendation as set forth above shall constitute a waiver of de novo review by the District Court and a waiver of appellate review by the Circuit Court of Appeals. Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363 (4th Cir. 1989); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984).
The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to provide a copy of this Order to any parties who appear pro se by certified mail, return receipt requested, and to all counsel of record, as applicable, as provided in the Administrative Procedures for Electronic Case Filing in the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia.