Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia adopted a magistrate judge’s proposed findings and recommendation in Jerome King’s civil action. The court denied King’s application to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs, denied as moot his motion to dismiss and refile a new Bivens action, dismissed the complaint, and dismissed the matter.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court was required to conduct de novo review of the magistrate judge's PF&R when no objections were filed.
- Whether the court should adopt the PF&R, deny the application to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs, and dismiss the complaint.
- Whether King's motion to dismiss and refile a new Bivens action was moot.
Holdings
- The district court was not required to conduct de novo or other review of the factual or legal conclusions in the PF&R because King filed no objections; failure to file timely objections waived de novo review and the right to appeal the order on those grounds.
- The court adopted the PF&R, denied King's application to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs, dismissed the complaint, and dismissed the matter.
- The motion to dismiss and refile a new Bivens action was denied as moot because King sought the same relief recommended by the PF&R and filed a new federal complaint against Officer Gearhart.
Key quotations
“Failure to file timely objections constitutes a waiver of de novo review and the Petitioner’s right to appeal the Court’s order.”
“The Court need not conduct de novo review when a party “makes general and conclusory objections that do not direct the Court to a specific error in the magistrate’s proposed findings and recommendations.””
Factual background
Jerome King filed a complaint against the Warden of FCI Beckley, the Acting Warden, and Officer Gearhart, along with an application to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs. After the magistrate judge recommended denying the application and dismissing the complaint, King filed no objections by the deadline. King also filed a motion seeking dismissal and permission to refile a new Bivens action; he filed a separate new complaint against Officer Gearhart the same day.
Procedural history
The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn, who filed a PF&R on February 25, 2026. Objections were due March 16, 2026, but none were filed. The district court adopted the PF&R, denied the application to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs, denied as moot the motion to dismiss and refile a new Bivens action, dismissed the complaint, and dismissed the matter.