Opinion
Civil Action 5:23-CV-207
08-14-2023
JEREMY COLTON LIGHT, Plaintiff, v. C.O. MILINI, ANGELO J. VIANI, KATHERINE N. HESS, CAPTAIN D. BAILEY, JOHN ANDERSON, SALEM CORRECTIONAL CENTER, DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS, STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA,
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
JOHN PRESTON BAILY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The above referenced case is before this Court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that the complaint be dismissed.
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate judge's report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge's report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984), cert, denied, 467 U.S. 1208 (1984). No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation.
Accordingly, a review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the magistrate judge's report and recommendation [Doc. 14] is ADOPTED. Plaintiff's complaint [Doc. 1] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as to defendants Viani, Hess, Bailey, Anderson, Salem Correctional Center, Division of Corrections, and State of West Virginia; and DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to defendant Milini.
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 plaintiff.