From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mink v. Wal-Mart Stores E., LP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA BECKLEY DIVISION
Jun 8, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:17-cv-02212 (S.D.W. Va. Jun. 8, 2017)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:17-cv-02212

06-08-2017

JAMES MINK, Plaintiff, v. WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP, et al., Defendants.


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

On March 3, 2017, the Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a Complaint in the Circuit Court of Wyoming County, West Virginia. The matter was removed to the United States District Court on April 4, 2017. Pending in the matter are Wal-Mart Stores East, LP's Motion to Dismiss (Document 4) and MacCorkle Lavender PLLC's Motion to Dismiss (Document 6).

By Standing Order (Document 2) entered on April 4, 2017, this action 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 May 17, 2017, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 16) wherein it is recommended that this Court grant the Defendants' respective motions to dismiss with prejudice, and remove this matter from the Court's docket. Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by June 5, 2017.

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 Wal-Mart Stores East, LP's Motion to Dismiss (Document 4) be GRANTED, that MacCorkle Lavender PLLC's Motion to Dismiss (Document 6) be GRANTED, and that this matter be DISMISSED with prejudice and 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.

ENTER: June 8, 2017

/s/_________

IRENE C. BERGER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA


Summaries of

Mink v. Wal-Mart Stores E., LP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA BECKLEY DIVISION
Jun 8, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:17-cv-02212 (S.D.W. Va. Jun. 8, 2017)
Case details for

Mink v. Wal-Mart Stores E., LP

Case Details

Full title:JAMES MINK, Plaintiff, v. WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA BECKLEY DIVISION

Date published: Jun 8, 2017

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:17-cv-02212 (S.D.W. Va. Jun. 8, 2017)