Miller v. Brown

Full title: ANDREW MILLER, Plaintiff, v. MIKE BROWN, et al., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Southern District of West Virginia

Date published: Mar 30, 2022

Civil Action 2:21-cv-00432 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 30, 2022)

Opinion

Civil Action 2:21-cv-00432

03-30-2022

ANDREW MILLER, Plaintiff, v. MIKE BROWN, et al., Defendants.

IRENE C. BERGER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

IRENE C. BERGER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On August 2, 2021, the Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed an Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs (Document 1) and a Complaint (Document 2). By Administrative Order (Document 3) entered on August 3, 2021, the matter was referred to the Honorable Omar J. Aboulhosn, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission to this Court of proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636.

On March 11, 2022, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 4) wherein it is recommended that this Court deny the Plaintiff's Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs (Document 1), dismiss the Plaintiff's Complaint (Document 2) without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and remove this matter from the Court's docket. Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by March 28, 2022. 1

Neither party has timely filed objections to the Magistrate Judge's Proposed Findings and Recommendation. 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). Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and a party's right to appeal this Court's Order. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984).

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the Proposed Findings and Recommendation, and ORDERS that the Plaintiffs Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs (Document 1) be DENIED, the Plaintiffs Complaint (Document 2) be DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), and the matter be REMOVED from the Court's docket.

The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Order to Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party. 2