Barnette v. Equifax, Inc. et al, No. 2:2018cv01348 - Document 28 (S.D.W. Va. 2019)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The 27 Proposed Findings and Recommendation is ADOPTED, FirstMark's 19 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED; this matter remains referred to Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for additional proceedings concerning the claims against the remaining Defendants. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 7/31/2019. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (kew)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION JASON BARNETTE, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:18-cv-01348 EQUIFAX, INC., et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pending before the Court is Defendant FirstMark Services, LLC’s (“FirstMark”) unopposed motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 19.) By Standing Order filed in this case on October 11, 2018, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation for disposition (“PF&R”). (ECF No. 2.) Magistrate Judge Tinsley entered his PF&R on July 12, 2019, recommending that the Court grant FirstMark’s Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 27.) 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 July 29, 2019. To date, no objections have been filed. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R, (ECF No. 27), and GRANTS FirstMark’s Motion to Dismiss, (ECF No. 19). The matter remains referred to Magistrate Judge Dwane L. Tinsley for additional proceedings concerning the claims against the remaining Defendants. 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: July 31, 2019
]]>
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.
