From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Molineaux v. Vickers

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION
Jan 18, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14-cv-12270 (S.D.W. Va. Jan. 18, 2017)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14-cv-12270

01-18-2017

KEITH MARTIN MOLINEAUX, JR., Plaintiff, v. JUDGE CHARLES M. VICKERS, et al., Defendants.


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiff Keith Martin Molineaux, Jr.'s Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees (ECF No. 1) and Complaint (ECF No. 2). By Standing Order entered February 7, 2014, and filed in this case on March 13, 2014, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation (PF&R). Magistrate Judge Tinsley filed his PF&R (ECF No. 4) on December 22, 2016, recommending that this Court DENY Plaintiff's Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and DISMISS Plaintiff's Complaint.

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 the Plaintiff'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). In addition, this Court need not conduct a 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 to the PF&R in this case were due on January 9, 2017. To date, no objections have been filed.

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R (ECF No. 4), DENIES the Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees (ECF No. 1), DISMISSES the Complaint (ECF No. 2), and directs the Clerk's Office to remove this case from the docket. A separate Judgment Order will enter this day implementing the rulings contained herein.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party.

ENTER: January 18, 2017

/s/_________

THOMAS E. JOHNSTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Molineaux v. Vickers

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION
Jan 18, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14-cv-12270 (S.D.W. Va. Jan. 18, 2017)
Case details for

Molineaux v. Vickers

Case Details

Full title:KEITH MARTIN MOLINEAUX, JR., Plaintiff, v. JUDGE CHARLES M. VICKERS, et…

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

Date published: Jan 18, 2017

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14-cv-12270 (S.D.W. Va. Jan. 18, 2017)