Stevens v. Appalachian Power Company, No. 2:2015cv09714 - Document 33 (S.D.W. Va. 2017)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER adopting the 32 Proposed Findings and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge; granting defendant's 30 Motion for Summary Judgment; and directing that this action be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 6/6/2017. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (taq)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION GOLDIE STEVENS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:15-cv-09714 APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is Defendant Appalachian Power Company’s unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 30.) Because Plaintiffs proceed pro se, this action was previously referred to United States Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation for disposition (“PF&R”). Magistrate Judge Tinsley filed his PF&R on May 8, 2017, recommending that the Court grant the summary judgment motion and dismiss this matter with prejudice. (ECF No. 32.) 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). Objections to the PF&R in this case were due on May 25, 2017. To date, no objections have been filed. The Court therefore ADOPTS the PF&R (ECF No. 32), GRANTS Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 30), and ORDERS that this action be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party. ENTER: 2 June 6, 2017

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.