Williams v. Wright

Filing 8

ORDER adopting the 6 Report and Recommendation and dismissing the case without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. Signed by Honorable Timothy M. Cain on 10/23/2017. (bgoo)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ROCK HILL DIVISION
Tyrone Williams,
Plaintiff,
v.
Chuck Wright, Sheriff, Warden/Designee,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 0:17-cv-02340-TMC
ORDER

Plaintiff, a state pretrial detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this
action seeking relief pursuant to Title 42, United States Code Section 1983. In accordance with
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to a magistrate
judge for pretrial handling. Before the court is the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation
(“Report”) that this case be dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of
process because Plaintiff failed to state a cognizable claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. 1983. (ECF
No. 6). Plaintiff was advised of his right to file objections to the Report and his right to bring the
case to proper form by the objection deadline. (ECF No. 6 at 5). However, Plaintiff did not file
any objections, and the time to do so has now run.
The Report has no presumptive weight and the responsibility to make a final determination
in this matter remains with this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270–71 (1976). In
the absence of objections, this court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the
Report. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Rather, “in 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

1

recommendation.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005)
(quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note).
After a careful and thorough review of the record under the appropriate standards, as set
forth above, the court adopts the Report (ECF No. 6), which is incorporated herein by reference.
Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance and service of
process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/Timothy M. Cain
United States District Judge
Anderson, South Carolina
October 23, 2017
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this order pursuant to Rules 3 and 4
of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

2