Glowka v. United States of America et al, No. 5:2014cv18500 - Document 15 (S.D.W. Va. 2014)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court ADOPTS the 10 Proposed Findings and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge and ORDERS (1) that the Plaintiff's Bivens claim alleging a violation of this First and Fifth Amendment rights be DISMISSED for thi s failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted and (2) that this matter be REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings on the Plaintiff's FTCA claim and Bivens claim alleging a violation of his Eighth Amendment rights. Signed by Judge Irene C. Berger on 7/31/2014. (cc: Magistrate Judge VanDervort; attys; any unrepresented party) (slr)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA BECKLEY DIVISION ADAM M. GLOWKA, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:14-cv-18500 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and MEDIC JEFFREY WALKER, Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On June 16, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a pro-se Complaint (Document 1). By Standing Order (Document 2) entered that same date, 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 July 9, 2014, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 10) wherein it is recommended that this Court dismiss the Plaintiff s Bivens claim alleging a violation of his First and Fifth Amendment rights for his failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted and refer the matter back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings on the Plaintiff s FTCA claim and Bivens claim alleging a violation of his Eight Amendment rights. Objections to the Magistrate Judge=s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by July 28, 2014. 1 Neither party has timely filed objections to the Magistrate Judge=s Proposed Findings and Recommendation. 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 a party s right to appeal this Court=s Order. 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1); see also Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the Proposed Findings and Recommendation, and ORDERS: 1) that the Plaintiff s Bivens claim alleging a violation of his First and Fifth Amendment rights be DISMISSED for his failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted; and 2) that this matter be REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings on the Plaintiff s FTCA claim and Bivens claim alleging a violation of his Eight Amendment rights. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to Magistrate Judge VanDervort, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party. ENTER: 2 July 31, 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.
