Opinion
CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 3:99-cr-1-02 (BAILEY).
May 6, 2008
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. By Order dated January 28, 2008 [Doc. 137], 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 April 16, 2008 [Doc. 142]. In that filing, the magistrate judge recommended that this Court grant the Motion for Production of Documents [Doc. 117], deny the Motion of Amendment of the Judgment and Commitment Order [Doc. 120], deny as moot the motion to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. 123], and deny the Motion for Court to Place in Abeyance the Ordered Restitution [Doc. 124].
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 Seibert's R R were due within ten (10) days of receipt, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). No objections have been filed. Accordingly, this Court will review the report and recommendation for clear error.
Upon careful review of the report and recommendation, it is the opinion of this Court that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. 142] should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated in the magistrate judge's report. Accordingly, the Court is of the opinion that the Motion for Production of Documents [Doc. 117] is GRANTED, the Motion of Amendment of the Judgment and Commitment Order [Doc. 120] is DENIED, the motion to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. 123] is DENIED AS MOOT, and the Motion for Court to Place in Abeyance the Ordered Restitution [Doc. 124] is DENIED.
Accordingly, the Clerk is DIRECTED to send the defendant a copy of CJA Forms 23 and 24. Defendant shall complete the forms and return them to the Clerk if he is financially unable to pay for the transcript. The Clerk shall order a copy of the transcript upon receipt of a financial affidavit showing the defendant does not have sufficient cash to purchase the transcript.
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 defendant.