Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:08-cv-00260.
March 14, 2011
ORDER
The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's Motion for Reinstatement [Docket 179]. By Order of Reference [Docket 182] entered October 18, 2010, the Court referred this matter to United States Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort for disposition. Magistrate Judge VanDervort filed Proposed Findings and Recommendation (PF R) on February 22, 2011 [Docket 186]. In that filing, Magistrate Judge VanDervort recommended that the undersigned deny Plaintiff's motion.
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 Petitioner's right to appeal this Court's order. See 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 VanDervort's PF R were due by March 11, 2011, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Crim.P. 59. To date, no party has filed any objections to the Magistrate Judge's Proposed Findings and Recommendation.
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 Plaintiff's Motion for Reinstatement [Docket 179] be DENIED.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party.