Djenasevic v. United States Department of Justice et al, No. 5:2014cv14596 - Document 56 (S.D.W. Va. 2014)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court ADOPTS the 52 Proposed Findings and Recommendation, and ORDERS that the 31 MOTION of the United States to Substitute be GRANTED, the 35 Motion of the United States to Dismiss be GRANTED, the Plaintiff� 39;s 1 and 9 Complaints be DISMISSED, and that this matter be REMOVED from the Court's docket; the Court ORDERS that the Plaintiff's 11 Affidavit in Support of In Forma Pauperis Status and the 13 Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Costs be DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 11/10/2014. (cc: Magistrate Judge VanDervort; attys; any unrepresented party) (slr)

Download PDF
Djenasevic v. United States Department of Justice et al Doc. 56 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA BECKLEY DIVISION KABIL ANTON DJENASEVIC, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:14-cv-14596 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On April 14, 2014, the Plaintiff, acting pro se, filed his Complaint (titled Notice of Intention to File Claim) (Document 1). The Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint (titled Complaint) (Document 9) on May 12, 2014. On July 15, 2014, the United States Motion to Substitute (Document 31) was filed. On July 18, 2014, the United States Motion to Dismiss (Document 35) was filed. By Standing Order (Document 4) entered on April 14, 2014, this action was referred to the Honorable R. Clarke VanDervort, 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. On October 16, 2014, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 52) wherein it is recommended that this Court grant the United States Motion to Substitute (Document 31), grant the United States Motion to Dismiss (Document 35), dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaints (Documents 1 & 9), and remove this matter from the Court’s docket. Objections to the Magistrate Judge=s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by November 3, 2014. 1 Dockets.Justia.com Ne either party has timely filed objectio to the M h f ons Magistrate Ju udge=s Propo osed Finding and gs Recommen ndation. Th Court is not required to review, u he n under a de n novo or any other standa the ard, factual or legal conc clusions of the magistr rate judge a to those portions o the findin or as e of ngs recommen ndation to wh hich no obje ections are addressed. T a Thomas v. A 474 U.S 140, 150 ( Arn, S. (1985). Failure to file timely objections co o onstitutes a waiver of de novo review and a part w e w ty’s right to appeal this Court= Order. 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1); se also Snyd v. Rideno 889 F.2 1363, 136 (4th =s 6 ee der our, 2d 66 Cir. 1989); United States v. Schron 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). nce, h Ac ccordingly, th Court AD he DOPTS and incorporate herein the findings an recommen es nd ndation of the Mag gistrate Judg as contained in the Pro ge oposed Find dings and Re ecommendati and OR ion, RDERS that the Un nited States Motion to Su M ubstitute (Do ocument 31) be GRANT ) TED, the Un nited States M Motion to Dismiss (Documen 35) be GRANTED, the Plainti s nt G iff’s Compla aints (Docu uments 1 & 9) be DISMISSED, and tha this matter be REMOV at r VED from th Court’s d he docket. stly, the Co ourt ORDER that the Plaintiff’s M 12, 2014, Affidavi in Suppor of In RS May it rt Las Forma Pa auperis Statu (Documen 11) and the Plaintiff May 13, 2014, Appli us nt t f’s ication to P Proceed Without Pr repayment of Fees and Costs (Docum 13) be DENIED A MOOT. C ment AS The Court DIR RECTS the Clerk to sen a certifie copy of t nd ed this Order to Magistrate Judge o e VanDervort, counsel of record, and any unrepr o resented par rty. ENTER: E 2 r November 10, 2014

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.