Case Information
*1 Case 5:11-cv-00014 Document 5 Filed 12/10/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA BECKLEY DIVISION
CHRYSTALIN CARTER,
Petitioner, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:11-cv-00014 MYRON BATTS,
Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has reviewed the Petitioner = s Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 2241 by a Person in Federal Custody (Document 1) filed on January 5, 2011.
By Standing Order (Document 2) entered on January 6, 2011, this action was referred to the Honorable R. Clarke VanDervort, United States Magistrate Judge, for submission to this Court of proposed findings of fact and recommendation for disposition, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 636. On November 21, 2013, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and Recommendation (Document 3) wherein it is recommended that this Court deny the Petitioner = s Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 2241 by a Person in Federal Custody and remove this matter from the Court’s docket. Objections to the Magistrate Judge = s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by December 9, 2013. [1] *2 Case 5:11-cv-00014 Document 5 Filed 12/10/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 26 Neither party has timely filed objections to the Magistrate Judge = s Proposed Findings and Recommendation . 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 the Petitioner = 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).
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS and incorporates herein the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as contained in the Proposed Findings and Recommendation , and ORDERS that the Petitioner = s Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 2241 by a Person in Federal Custody (Document 1) be DENIED , and that this matter be REMOVED from the Court’s docket.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Order to Magistrate Judge VanDervort, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party.
ENTER: December 10, 2013 2
[1] The docket reflects that the Proposed Findings and Recommendation mailed to the Petitioner was returned as undeliverable on December 2, 2013. 1