Blake v. Maze et al, No. 2:2009cv01153 - Document 5 (S.D.W. Va. 2010)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting the 4 Proposed Findings and Recommendation set forth therein; DISMISSES plaintiff's complaint and DIRECTS the Clerk to remove this action from the active docket of this court. Signed by Judge David A. Faber on 1/6/2010. (cc: plaintiff, attys) (mkw)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT CHARLESTON ROBERT BLAKE, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:09-1153 SGT. PRICE MAZE, et al., Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending before the court is plaintiff s letter-form complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which states that he wants to file a lawsuit against certain employees of the West Virginia Division of Corrections about them [messing] with my money the way [they] are and about my check been cut open by CO I David Miller. (Doc. No. 1 at 1.) By Standing Order entered August 1, 2006, and filed in this case on October 21, 2009, this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Mary E. Stanley. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the Standing Order directs Magistrate Judge Stanley to submit proposed findings and recommendation concerning the disposition of this matter. Magistrate Judge Stanley submitted her Proposed Findings and Recommendation ( PF & R ) on December 2, 2009, recommending that this court dismiss plaintiff s complaint for failure to prosecute. (Doc. No. 4.) In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the parties were allotted fourteen days, plus three mailing days, in which to file any objections to Magistrate Judge Stanley s PF & R. Under § 636(b), the failure of any party to file objections within the appropriate time frame constitutes a waiver of that party s right to a de novo review by this court. Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363 (4th Cir. 1989); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). No party has filed objections to the magistrate judge s report, and the time period for doing so has now elapsed. Having reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Stanley, the court (1) ADOPTS the findings and conclusions set forth therein; (2) DISMISSES plaintiff s complaint; and (3) DIRECTS the Clerk to remove this action from the active docket of this court. The Clerk is further directed to forward a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to plaintiff and to all counsel of record. It is SO ORDERED this 6th day of January, 2010. 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.
