Johnson v. Butler, No. 1:2013cv04401 - Document 44 (S.D.W. Va. 2014)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court ADOPTS the 43 Proposed Findings and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort; GRANTS Respondent's 40 MOTION to Dismiss and DIRECTS the Clerk to remove this case from the Court's docket. Signed by Senior Judge David A. Faber on 9/29/2014. (cc: Petitioner, Pro Se and counsel of record) (arb)

Download PDF
Johnson v. Butler Doc. 44 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT BLUEFIELD LA SHAN DENEICE JOHNSON, Petitioner, v. Civil Action No: 1:13-04401 SANDRA BUTLER, Warden Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER By Standing Order, this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort for submission of findings and recommendations regarding disposition, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Magistrate Judge VanDervort submitted to the court his Proposed Findings and Recommendation on September 5, 2014, in which he recommended that the district court grant respondent s Motion to Dismiss and remove this matter from the court s docket. (Doc. No. 43). In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), petitioner was allotted fourteen days, plus three mailing days, in which to file any objections to Magistrate Judge VanDervort s Findings and Recommendation. The failure to file such objections constitutes a waiver of the right to a de novo review by this court. Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363 (4th Cir. 1989).   1  Dockets.Justia.com Petitioner failed to file any objections to the Magistrate Judge s Findings and Recommendation within the seventeen-day period. Having reviewed the Findings and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge VanDervort, the court adopts the findings and recommendation contained therein. The court hereby GRANTS respondent s Motion to Dismiss and DIRECTS the Clerk to remove this case from the court s docket. The Clerk is further directed to forward a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to petitioner, pro se. It is SO ORDERED this 29th day of September, 2014.               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.