Summary
dismissing claims based on three man cells and stating "plaintiff has failed to show he was ever subjected to any unsanitary or dangerous condition that rose to the level of an Eighth Amendment violation."
Summary of this case from Holmes v. WattsOpinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:09-CV-107 (BAILEY)
03-29-2012
WILLIAM EUGENE WEBB, Plaintiff, v. KUMA J. DEBOO, Warden, Federal Correctional Institution at Gilmer, Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On this day, the above-styled matter came before the Court for consideration of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge James E. Seibert [Doc. 90]. By Standing Order, entered on March 24, 2000, this action was referred to Magistrate Judge Joel for submission of a proposed report and recommendation ("R&R"). Magistrate Judge Seibert filed his R&R on January 6, 2012. In that filing, the magistrate judge recommends that this Court grant defendant Kuma J. Deboo's Supplemental Motion to Dismiss, or, in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 54] and Motion to File Unredacted Documents under Seal [Doc. 70]; dismiss plaintiff William Eugene Webb's Complaint [Doc. 1]; and deny as moot Webb's Motion to Order Service [Doc. 65] and Motion to Compel Postage [Doc. 80].
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c), this Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions of the magistrate judge's findings to which objection is made. However, 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 the petitioner's right to appeal this Court's Order. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 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 Seibert's R&R were due by March 27, 2012. To date, no objections have been filed. Accordingly, this Court will review the R&R for clear error.
Upon careful review of the record, it is the opinion of this Court that the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. 90] should be, and is, hereby ORDERED ADOPTED for the reasons more fully stated therein. Accordingly, Deboo's Motion to Dismiss, or, in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 54] is hereby GRANTED and consequently Webb's Complaint [Doc. 1] is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. In addition, Deboo's Motion to File Unredacted Documents under Seal [Doc. 70] is hereby GRANTED and Webb's Motion to Order Service [Doc. 65] and Motion to Compel Postage [Doc. 80] are hereby DENIED AS MOOT. This Court DIRECTS the Clerk to enter judgment in favor of Deboo and strike this case from the active docket of this Court.
As a final matter, upon an independent review of the record, this Court hereby DENIES a certificate of appealability, finding that Webb has failed to make "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to transmit copies of this Order to all counsel of record and to mail a copy to the pro se plaintiff.
___________
JOHN PRESTON BAILEY
UNTED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE