Feather-Gorbey v. Govenor et al, No. 5:2022cv00179 - Document 5 (S.D.W. Va. 2022)
Court Description: ORDER adopting the 4 Proposed Findings and Recommendations by Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn; dismissing the 1 Complaint; and dismissing the matter. Signed by Judge Frank W. Volk on 7/13/2022. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (jsa)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Feather-Gorbey v. Govenor et al Doc. 5 Case 5:22-cv-00179 Document 5 Filed 07/13/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA AT BECKLEY (CHIEF) COL. MICHAEL S. OWL FEATHER-GORBEY, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:22-cv-00179 GOVERNOR for the State of West Virginia, and U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Defendants. ORDER Pending is a Complaint by (Chief) Col. Michael S. Owl Feather-Gorbey brought pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), filed April 13, 2022. [Doc. 1]. This action was previously referred to the Honorable Omar J. Aboulhosn, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation (“PF&R”). Magistrate Judge Aboulhosn filed his PF&R on June 2, 2022, recommending the Court dismiss the Complaint and remove the case from the Court’s docket. [Doc. 4]. I. The Court is required “to make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Court need not 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. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); see also 28 U.S.C. Dockets.Justia.com Case 5:22-cv-00179 Document 5 Filed 07/13/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 20 § 636(b)(1) (“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)). Further, the Court need not conduct a de novo review when a party “makes general and conclusory objections that do not direct the Court to a specific error in the magistrate’s proposed findings and recommendations.” Orpiano v. Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982). Objections were due on June 21, 2022. No objections were filed. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF&R [Doc. 4], DISMISSES the Complaint [Doc. 1], and DISMISSES the matter. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to transmit a copy of this Order to any counsel of record and any unrepresented party. ENTER: 2 July 13, 2022
]]>
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.
