Williamson v. Sterling et al
Filing
171
ORDER adopting the 166 Report and Recommendation, dismissing Plaintiff's 150 Second Amended Complaint without prejudice and without issuance and service of process, and rendering as moot all of the pending motions 149 , 159 , 160 , and 161 . Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 6/22/2017. (bgoo)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ROCK HILL DIVISION
DUSTIN ROBERT WILLIAMSON,
Plaintiff,
vs.
CLARENCE ROGERS and DEBRA
EASTRIDGE,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. 0:15-4755-MGL
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION,
DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF PROCESS,
AND RENDERING AS MOOT ALL OF THE PENDING MOTIONS
Plaintiff filed this case as a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. He is proceeding pro se. The matter
is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States
Magistrate Judge suggesting Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint be dismissed without prejudice
and without issuance and service of process. The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C.
§ 636 and Local Civil Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has
no presumptive weight. The responsibility to make a final determination remains with the Court.
Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo
determination of those portions of the Report to which specific objection is made, and the Court may
accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge or
recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on June 2, 2017, but Plaintiff failed to file any
objections. “[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo
review, but instead must ‘only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in
order to accept the recommendation.’” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d310, 315
(4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note). Moreover, a failure to object
waives appellate review.
Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).
After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard set
forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment
of the Court Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE
and without issuance and service of process.
This decision necessarily RENDERS AS MOOT all of the pending motions to dismiss.
Further, inasmuch as Plaintiff filed his notice of appeal within the time period provided by the
applicable rules, his motion to extend the time for filing his notice of appeal is also RENDERED
AS MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 22nd day of June, 2017, in Columbia, South Carolina.
s/ Mary Geiger Lewis
MARY GEIGER LEWIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
*****
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from the
date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?