Opinion
Civil Action 3:23-CV-9 (GROH)
07-20-2023
CARLOS FERNANDEZ CAICEDO-ORTIZ, Petitioner, v. WARDEN R. BROWN, Respondent.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
GINA M. GROH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Now before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Robert W. Trumble. Pursuant to this Court's Local Rules, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Trumble for submission of a proposed R&R. Magistrate Judge Trumble issued his R&R [ECF No. 15] on May 16, 2023. Therein, Magistrate Judge Trumble recommends that the Petitioner's § 2241 petition [ECF No. 1] be denied and dismissed without prejudice.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court must conduct a de novo review of the magistrate judge's findings where objection is made. However, the Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the magistrate judge's factual or legal conclusions to which no objection is made. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Failure to timely file objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and of a petitioner's right to appeal this Order. 28.U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984).
Objections to Magistrate Judge Trumble's R&R were due within fourteen days of service. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). The R&R was mailed to the Petitioner by certified mail on May 16, 2023. ECF No. 15. The Petitioner accepted service on May 23, 2023. ECF No. 16. To date, no objections have been filed. Accordingly, this Court reviews the R&R for clear error.
Upon careful review and thoughtful consideration, it is the opinion of this Court that Magistrate Judge Trumble's R&R [ECF No. 15] should be, and is hereby, ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated therein. Therefore, the Respondent's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 9] is GRANTED and Petitioner's § 2241 Petition [ECF No. 1] is DENIED and DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
This matter is ORDERED STRICKEN from the Court's active docket. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Petitioner by certified mail, return receipt requested, at his last known address as reflected on the docket sheet.