Sandlain v. Warden, No. 1:2020cv00424 - Document 24 (S.D.W. Va. 2021)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting the 23 Proposed Findings and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge. The Court hereby DENIES 17 MOTION by Blake Sandlain for Default Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. (A)(D), and the matter remains referred to Magistrate Judge Tinsley for further proceedings. Signed by Senior Judge David A. Faber on 6/2/2021. (cc: plaintiff, pro se; counsel of record) (mk)

Download PDF
Sandlain v. Warden Doc. 24 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT BLUEFIELD BLAKE SANDLAIN, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:20-00424 WARDEN, FCI MCDOWELL, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER By Standing Order, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for submission of findings and recommendation regarding disposition pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B). Magistrate Judge Tinsley submitted to the court his Findings and Recommendation on March 25, 2021, in which he recommended that the district court deny Sandlain’s motion for default and leave the matter referred to him for further findings on the merits. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b), the parties were allotted fourteen days, plus three mailing days, in which to file any objections to Magistrate Judge Tinsley’s Findings and Recommendation. The failure of any party to file such objections 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). The parties failed to file any objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation within the allotted time Dockets.Justia.com period. Having reviewed the Findings and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Tinsley, the court adopts the findings and recommendations contained therein. Accordingly, the court hereby DENIES plaintiff’s motion for default and the matter remains referred to Magistrate Judge Tinsley for further proceedings. The Clerk is directed to forward a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to plaintiff, pro se, and counsel of record. IT IS SO ORDERED this 2nd day of June, 2021. 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.