Opinion
Civil Action 5:22-cv-00199
01-04-2023
RYAN MELVIN, Petitioner, v. K. HECKARD, Warden, Respondent.
ORDER
Frank W. Volk United States District Judge.
Pending are Petitioner Ryan Melvin's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 [Doc. 1], filed April 25, 2022, and Respondent's request to deny the petition and dismiss this matter [Doc. 8], filed May 25, 2022. This action was previously referred to the Honorable Cheryl A. Eifert, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation (“PF&R”). Magistrate Judge Eifert filed her PF&R on November 29, 2022. Magistrate Judge Eifert recommended that the Court deny the Petition, grant the request for dismissal, and dismiss this action.
The Court need not 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. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (“A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” (emphasis added)). Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the Petitioner's right to appeal the Court's order. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also United States v. De Leon-Ramirez, 925 F.3d 177, 181 (4th Cir. 2019) (Parties may not typically “appeal a magistrate judge's findings that were not objected to below, as § 636(b) doesn't require de novo review absent objection.”); Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989). Further, the Court need not conduct de novo review when a party “makes general and conclusory objections that do not direct the Court to a specific error in the magistrate's proposed findings and recommendations.” Orpiano v. Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982). Objections in this case were due on December 16, 2022. No objections were filed.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R [Doc. 13], GRANTS Respondent's request for dismissal [Doc. 8], DISMISSES the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. 1], and DISMISSES the matter.
The Court directs the Clerk to transmit a copy of this Order to any counsel of record and any unrepresented party.