Bostic v. Astrue, No. 1:2008cv01179 - Document 14 (S.D.W. Va. 2009)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting the 13 proposed Findings and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge VanDervort. Plaintiff's motion for voluntary dismissal is GRANTED. Case is DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Judge David A. Faber on 6/19/2009. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (mjp)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT BLUEFIELD JACK E. BOSTIC, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:08-1179 MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER By Standing Order, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort for submission of findings and recommendation regarding disposition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Magistrate Judge VanDervort submitted to the court his Findings and Recommendation on May 19, 2009, in which he recommended that the court grant plaintiff's motion to dismiss, and dismiss this matter with prejudice. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), plaintiff was allotted ten days and three mailing days in which to file any objections to Magistrate Judge VanDervort's Findings and Recommendation. The failure of any party to file such objections within the time allowed constitutes a waiver of such party's right to a de novo review by this court. Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363 (4th Cir. 1989). Neither party filed any objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations within the thirteen-day period. Accordingly, the court adopts the Findings and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge VanDervort as follows: 1. Plaintiff s motion for voluntary dismissal is GRANTED; and 2. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk is directed to forward a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to counsel of record. IT IS SO ORDERED this 19th of June, 2009. ENTER: David A. Faber Senior United States District Judge 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.