Opinion
Civil Action No. 2:16-CV-5
10-25-2016
THOMAS DONO, Petitioner, v. CHARLES WILLIAMS, Warden, Respondent.
(BAILEY)
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On this day, the above-styled matter came before this Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Aloi [Doc. 18]. Pursuant to this Court's Local Rules, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Aloi for submission of a proposed report and a recommendation ("R & R"). Magistrate Judge Aloi filed his R&R on August 30, 2016, wherein he recommends this Court deny and dismiss petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 [Doc. 1], and grant respondent's Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment [Doc. 8].
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c), this Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions of the magistrate judge's findings to which objection is made. However, 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). In addition, failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the right to appeal this Court's 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). Here, objections to Magistrate Judge Aloi's R&R were due within fourteen (14) days of receipt, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). The docket reflects that service was accepted on September 6, 2016 [Doc. 19]. On September 22, 2016, petitioner filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to R&R [Doc. 20], which this Court granted by Order [Doc. 21] the same day. In that Order, petitioner was granted until October 24, 2016, to file his objections [Id.]. No objections have been filed to date. This Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error, and has found none.
Upon careful review of the above, it is the opinion of this Court that the Report and Recommendation [Doc. 18] should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated in the magistrate judge's report. Accordingly, this Court ORDERS that the plaintiff's Complaint [Doc. 1] be DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Additionally, respondent's Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment [Doc. 8] his hereby GRANTED. This Court further DIRECTS the Clerk to enter judgment in favor of the respondent and to STRIKE this case from the active docket of this Court.
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to any counsel of record and to mail a copy to the pro se petitioner.
DATED: October 25, 2016.
/s/ _________
JOHN PRESTON BAILEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE