Alshurafa v. Wimbish et al, No. 1:2020cv00546 - Document 35 (S.D.W. Va. 2021)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting the 34 Proposed Findings and Recommendations by Magistrate Judge as follows: Defendants' 21 Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED; Plaintiff's 5 Amended Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice; and This case is removed from the docket of the court. Signed by Senior Judge David A. Faber on 11/3/2021. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented parties) (mk)

Download PDF
Alshurafa v. Wimbish et al Doc. 35 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT BLUEFIELD TRACY AHMAD ALSHURAFA, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:20-00546 CAPTAIN WIMBISH, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER By Standing Order, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cheryl A. Eifert for submission of findings and recommendations regarding disposition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Magistrate Judge Eifert submitted to the court her Proposed Findings and Recommendation (“PF&R”) on July 1, 2021, in which she recommended that the court grant defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 21); dismiss the amended complaint with prejudice (ECF No. 5); and remove this case from the docket of the court. (ECF No. 34.) In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the parties were allotted fourteen days and three mailing days in which to file objections to the PF&R. The failure of any party to file such objections within the time allowed constitutes a waiver of such party’s right to a de novo review Dockets.Justia.com by this court. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985); Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1365-66 (4th Cir. 1989); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (“A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” (emphasis added)). Neither party filed objections to the PF&R within the required time period. Accordingly, the court adopts the PF&R as follows: 1. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 21) is GRANTED; 2. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (ECF No. 5) is DISMISSED with prejudice; and 3. This case is removed from the docket of the court. The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented parties. IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day of November, 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.