McLaurin v. Rubenstein et al, No. 2:2011cv00090 - Document 41 (S.D.W. Va. 2012)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting and incorporating herein the 37 Proposed Findings and Recommendation; denying plaintiff's 40 Request for an Enlargement of Seven Days to File his Objection to Proposed Findings and Recommendation; granting defendants' 26 MOTION to Dismiss with prejudice. Signed by Judge Joseph R. Goodwin on 3/21/2012. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (cjy)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION JOHN F. MCLAURIN, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:11-cv-00090 JIM RUBENSTEIN, et al., Defendants MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This action was referred to the Honorable Mary E. Stanley, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission to this court of proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The Magistrate Judge has submitted findings of fact and has recommended that the court GRANT the Defendants Motion to Dismiss [Docket 26] and DISMISS the action with prejudice. The plaintiff filed a Request for Enlargement of Time to File his Objections to the Magistrate Proposed Finding and Recommendation [Docket 38]. The court granted the plaintiff s request and directed the plaintiff to file his objections by March 16, 2012. Subsequently, the plaintiff filed a second Request for Enlargement of Seven Days to File his Objections to the Magistrate Proposed Findings and Recommendations [Docket 40]. Because the court FINDS that the plaintiff has had adequate time to file his objections, I DENY the plaintiff s Request for Enlargement of Seven Days to File his Objections to the Magistrate Proposed Findings and Recommendations. 1 A district court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). This court is not, however, 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). As the plaintiff has not filed objections in this case, the court adopts and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and orders judgment consistent therewith. The court GRANTS the Defendants Motion to Dismiss and DISMISSES the action with prejudice. The court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party. ENTER: 2 March 21, 2012
]]>
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.
