From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moody v. Logan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
Apr 30, 2013
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:13CV24 (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 30, 2013)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:13CV24

04-30-2013

ANDREW MOODY, Plaintiff, v. ARTHUR LOGAN, JR. Respondent.


(Judge Keeley)


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On February 7, 2013, the pro se plaintiff, Andrew Moody ("Moody"), filed a civil rights complaint in the United States District Court in the Southern District of West Virginia, pursuant to petition pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). The complaint was transferred to this Court, and referred to United States Magistrate Judge John S. Kaull for initial screening and a report and recommendation in accordance with LR PL P 2. On February 15, 2013, Moody moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Dkt. No. 9). Upon further inquiry, the Court learned that the plaintiff, who is currently incarcerated by the Bureau of Prisons, possessed $464.01 as of February 27, 2013 in his Prisoner Trust Account, and thus was capable of paying the $350 filing fee necessary to proceed with his suit.

On March 7, 2013, Magistrate Judge Kaull issued an Opinion and Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), in which he recommended that Moody's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis be denied because Moody is capable of paying the filing fee. The R&R also specifically warned Moody that his failure to object to the recommendation would result in the waiver of any appellate rights he might otherwise have on this issue. The parties did not file any objections.

The failure to object to the Report and Recommendation not only waives the appellate rights in this matter, but also relieves the Court of any obligation to conduct a de novo review of the issue presented. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 148-153 (1985); Wells v. Shriners Hosp., 109 F.3d 198, 199-200 (4th Cir. 1997).

Consequently, finding no clear error, the Court: • ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in its entirety (dkt. no. 20); • DENIES the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (dkt. no. 9); • GRANTS the plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time to Pay Filing Fee (dkt. no. 24); and • ORDERS the plaintiff to pay the $350 filing fee by May 30, 2013.

It is so ORDERED.

The Court directs the Clerk of Court to transmit copies of this order to counsel of record and to the pro se plaintiff, certified mail, return receipt requested.

___________

IRENE M. KEELEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Moody v. Logan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
Apr 30, 2013
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:13CV24 (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 30, 2013)
Case details for

Moody v. Logan

Case Details

Full title:ANDREW MOODY, Plaintiff, v. ARTHUR LOGAN, JR. Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

Date published: Apr 30, 2013

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:13CV24 (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 30, 2013)

Citing Cases

Mueller v. Keeley

No special findings were requested by either side. In Moody v. Arthur, 16 Kan. 419, 429, Mr. Justice Brewer,…

First National Bank v. Cochran

The method of attack by objection to the introduction of any evidence is not favored by the courts, and while…