Harris v. Major et al

Filing 76

ORDER accepting 70 Report and Recommendation. This action is dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Rule 41 (b). Additionally, Defendants' 45 Motion to Dismiss is terminated as moot. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 2/3/2016. (mwal)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Shantel Harris,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Simon Major, Director, et al.,

Defendants.
_______________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 0:15-527-MGL

ORDER

On February 4, 2015, the Plaintiff, Shantel Harris, (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, brought
this civil action seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1). The matter now comes
before this Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (“the Report”) filed by Magistrate
Judge Paige J. Gossett, to whom this case had previously been assigned. In the Report, the
Magistrate Judge recommends that Plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed for failure to prosecute
pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and other cited authorities. (ECF
No. 70). Objections to the Report were due by February 1, 2016. Plaintiff filed no objections to
the Report.
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept,
reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that Report. 28 U.S.C. §
636. In the absence of objections to the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, this
Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v.
Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983).

1

The Court has carefully reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and finds no error in the
Report. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, it is hereby ORDERED that the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED, (ECF No. 70), and this action
is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Rule 41(b) and other cited
authorities. Additionally, in light of the foregoing, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, (ECF No. 45),
is properly terminated as MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

____s/Mary G. Lewis____
United States District Judge

February 3, 2016
Columbia, South Carolina

2