From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Motjuste Tirade of Vim Andre Juste v. Brennan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA MARTINSBURG
Apr 21, 2014
Civil Action No. 3:13-CV-182 (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 21, 2014)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 3:13-CV-182

04-21-2014

MOTJUSTE TIRADE OF VIM ANDRE JUSTE, ANDRE JUSTE, and AIMEE AMARAIH ANDRE JUSTE Plaintiffs, v. LINDSAY ANNMARIE BRENNAN, a/k/a Lindsay Annmarie Phillips, WAL-MART CORPORATE, INC., and STEFANIE FAITH BRENNAN, Defendants.


(JUDGE GROH)


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On this day, the above-styled matter came before the Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge James E. Seibert. Pursuant to this Court's Local Rules, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Seibert for submission of a proposed report and a recommendation ("R & R"). Magistrate Judge Seibert filed his R & R on February 25, 2014 [Doc. 6]. In that filing, the magistrate judge recommends that this Court dismiss the complaint with prejudice and deny as moot the Plaintiffs' Application for Leave to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees [Doc. 2].

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c), this Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions of the magistrate judge's findings to which objection is made. However, 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 the petitioner's right to appeal this Court's Order. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984).

Objections to Magistrate Judge Seibert's R & R were due within fourteen (14) days of being served with a copy of the same, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Plaintiff Andre Juste accepted service of the R & R on March 24, 2014 [Doc. 7]. The copy of the R & R sent to Plaintiff Motjuste Tirade of Vim Andre Juste via certified mail, return receipt requested was returned to the clerk's office on April 7, 2014 marked "unclaimed" and "unable to forward" [Doc. 9]. None of the Plaintiffs have filed objections to the R & R. Accordingly, this Court will review the report and recommendation for clear error.

Plaintiff Motjuste Tirade of Vim Andre Juste has not provided the Court with an updated mailing address since initiating this case.

Upon careful review of the report and recommendation, it is the opinion of this Court that the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated in the magistrate judge's report. Accordingly, the Court hereby DISMISSES the complaint WITH PREJUDICE and DENIES AS MOOT the Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees. Accordingly, this matter is hereby ORDERED STRICKEN from the active docket of this Court.

It is so ORDERED.

The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to all counsel of record and to any pro se parties.

_________________

GINA M. GROH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Motjuste Tirade of Vim Andre Juste v. Brennan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA MARTINSBURG
Apr 21, 2014
Civil Action No. 3:13-CV-182 (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 21, 2014)
Case details for

Motjuste Tirade of Vim Andre Juste v. Brennan

Case Details

Full title:MOTJUSTE TIRADE OF VIM ANDRE JUSTE, ANDRE JUSTE, and AIMEE AMARAIH ANDRE…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA MARTINSBURG

Date published: Apr 21, 2014

Citations

Civil Action No. 3:13-CV-182 (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 21, 2014)