Coleman v. Ray ( 2023 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA MARTINSBURG LORENZO C. COLEMAN, Petitioner, v. CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:23-CV-82 (GROH) H.L. RAY, Respondent. ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Now before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) issued by United States Magistrate Judge Robert W. Trumble. ECF No. 44. Pursuant to the Local Rules, this civil action was referred to Judge Trumble for submission of a proposed R&R. Judge Trumble issued an R&R on October 26, 2023, recommending (1) the Petitioner’s Petition for Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 [ECF No. 1] be denied and dismissed with prejudice and (2) the Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 32] be granted. 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). Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and of 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 Trumble’s R&R were due within fourteen plus three days of the Petitioner being served with a copy of the same. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Service of the R&R was accepted on November 2, 2023. ECF No. 45. As of the date of this Order, no objections have been filed. Therefore, after allowing additional time for transit in the mail, the Court finds that the deadline for the Petitioner to submit objections to the R&R has passed. Accordingly, this Court will review the R&R for clear error. Upon careful review of the R&R, it is the opinion of this Court that Magistrate Judge Trumble’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 44] should be, and is hereby, ORDERED ADOPTED. For the reasons more fully stated in the R&R, the Petitioner's Petition for Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to STRIKE this case from the Court’s active docket. The Clerk is FURTHER DIRECTED to mail a copy of this Order to the pro se Petitioner by certified mail, return receipt requested, at his last known address as reflected on the docket sheet. DATED: December 18, 2023 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE