The opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
BECKLEY DIVISION
ERNEST J. BROWN,
Petitioner,
v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:15-cv-11349
JOE COAKLEY, Warden, FCI Beckley,
Respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On July 20, 2015, the Petitioner, proceeding pro se, filed his Application Under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241 for Writ of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State or Federal Custody (Document 1). By
Standing Order (Document 4) entered that same date, this action was referred to the Honorable
Dwane L. Tinsley, 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 April 2, 2018, the Magistrate Judge submitted a Proposed Findings and
Recommendation (Document 6) wherein it is recommended that the Petitioner’s Application Under
28 U.S.C. § 2241 for Writ of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State or Federal Custody (Document
1) be denied, and that this matter be dismissed from the Court’s docket. Objections to the
Magistrate Judge=s Proposed Findings and Recommendation were due by April 19, 2018, and none
were filed by either party.1
1 The docket reflects that the Proposed Findings and Recommendation mailed to the Petitioner was
returned as undeliverable on April 9, 2018.
1
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 Under 28 U.S.C. § 224] for Writ
of Habeas Corpus By a Person in State or Federal Custody (Document 1) be DENIED, and that
this matter be DISMISSED from the Court’s docket.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a certified copy of this Order to Magistrate Judge
Tinsley, counsel of record, and any unrepresented party.
ENTER: April 30, 2018
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA