Opinion
Civil Action No. 2:13cv72
04-25-2014
TYRONE ROGERS, Plaintiff, v. DR. DAVID PROCTOR, Doctor, DR. MARK BAKER, Wexford Medical Sources Consultant, TRISTAN TENNEY, Medical Administrator, ADRIAN HOKE, Ex-Warden, MARVIN C. PLUMLEY, Warden, JIM RUBENSTEIN, Commissioner, DEBBIE HISSOM, Medical Director, RN, BSN, Defendants.
(Judge Bailey)
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On this day, the above-styled matter came before this Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge John S. Kaull [Doc. 23]. By Local Rule, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Kaull for submission of a report and a recommendation ("R&R"). Magistrate Judge Kaull filed his R&R on April 3, 2014.
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 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). Here, objections to Magistrate Judge Kaull's R&R were due within fourteen (14) days of receipt, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The docket reflects that service was accepted on April 7, 2014 [Doc. 24]. No objections have been filed. Accordingly, the R&R will be reviewed for clear error.
Upon careful review of the above, it is the opinion of this Court that the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. 23] should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated in the magistrate judge's report. Accordingly, the claims against Adrian Hoke, Marvin C. Plumley, and Jim Rubenstein are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment for these parties. The plaintiff's claims against defendant David Proctor, Tristan Tenney, Mark Baker, and Debbie Hissom shall proceed, and it is ORDERED that those defendants be SERVED with copies of the summons and Complaint by the United States Marshals Service. Finally, the plaintiff's Motion for Injunction/Restraining Order [Doc. 7] and Motion for Declaratory Judgment [Doc. 8] are DENIED.
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to any counsel of record and to mail a copy to the pro se plaintiff.
__________
JOHN PRESTON BAILEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE