Summary
finding that Plaintiff's allegations including inadequate space between beds and inadequate "head space" for inmates on top bunks "do not rise to the level of an Eighth Amendment claim"
Summary of this case from Holmes v. WattsOpinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:06-cv-00065.
February 6, 2009
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before the Court are Plaintiffs' Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis [Docket 3] and Plaintiffs' Complaint [Dockets 1 — 2]. By Standing Order entered on July 2, 2004, and filed in this case on January 30, 2006, this action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort for submission of proposed findings and a recommendation (PF R). Magistrate Judge VanDervort filed his PF R [Docket 10] on January 16, 2009, recommending that this Court DENY Plaintiffs' Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis, DISMISS Plaintiffs' Complaint, and remove this matter from the Court's docket.
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). In addition, failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and Plaintiffs' right to appeal this Court's Order. Snyder v. Ridenour, 889 F.2d 1363, 1366 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 (4th Cir. 1984). Here, objections to Magistrate Judge VanDervort's PF R were due by February 2, 2009, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). To date, no objections have been filed.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the PF R [Docket 10] in its entirety, DENIES Plaintiffs' Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis [Docket 3], and DISMISSES Plaintiffs' Complaint [Dockets 1 — 2]. A separate Judgment Order will enter this day implementing the rulings contained herein.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party.