The opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
Wheeling
RODNEY COMPTON,
Petitioner,
V. Civil Action No. 5:23-CV-237
Judge Bailey
R. BROWN, Warden, FCI Gilmer,
Respondent.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The above-captioned case is before this Court upon the magistrate judge’s
recommendation that the petition be denied and dismissed without prejudice.
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the
magistrate judge’s report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject,
or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that
Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of
the magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who
fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge’s report pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United
States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1208 (1984). No
objections have been filed to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation within the
prescribed time frame.
Accordingly, a review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge’s report
accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. As such, the magistrate judge’s
report and recommendation [Doc. 10] is ADOPTED. Petitioner's petition [Doc. 1] is
DENIED and DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and the Clerk is instructed to strike this
matter from the active docket of this Court.
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to any counsel of record and
to mail a copy to petitioner.
DATED: September 6, 2023.
Ko OS
JOHN PRESTON BAILEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE