Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:13-cv-22734
09-30-2015
ANDRE' WILSON, Plaintiff, v. OFFICER TIM PATTERSON, et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Pending before the Court is the defendants' motion for summary judgment. (ECF 78.) On September 11, 2013, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for submission of proposed findings of fact and a recommendation for disposition ("PF&R"). On July 30, 2015, Magistrate Judge Tinsley filed a PF&R, (ECF 97), recommending that this Court grant the defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismiss this matter from the Court's docket.
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 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). 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 August 17, 2015. To date, no objections have been filed.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R, (ECF 97), GRANTS the defendants' motion for summary judgment, (ECF 78), and DISMISSES this case, and DIRECTS the Clerk to remove this action from the Court's docket.
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: September 30, 2015
/s/_________
THOMAS E. JOHNSTON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE