Clowney v. S.C.D.C.
Filing
20
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, SUMMARILY DISMISSING THIS CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF PROCESS, AND DEEMING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY: After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case under the standard set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of the Court this case is summarily DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and without issuance and service of process. Because this case is dismissed, Clowney's motion for discovery is necessarily DEEMED AS MOOT. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 01/28/2025. (apsn)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ROCK HILL DIVISION
RICHARD VANDALE CLOWNEY,
Plaintiff,
vs.
S.C.D.C.,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Civil Action No. 0:24-6381-MGL
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION,
SUMMARILY DISMISSING THIS CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE
AND WITHOUT ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF PROCESS,
AND DEEMING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY
Plaintiff Richard Vandale Clowney (Clowney), who is representing himself, filed this civil
action against Defendant S.C.D.C., alleging violations of his constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983.
This matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of
the United States Magistrate Judge recommending the Court summarily dismiss this case 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 December 30, 2024. To date, Clowney has 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 & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d
310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005). 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 under the standard set
forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment
of the Court this case is summarily DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and without issuance
and service of process.
Because this case is dismissed, Clowney’s motion for discovery is necessarily DEEMED
AS MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 28th day of January 2025, in Columbia, South Carolina.
s/ Mary Geiger Lewis
MARY GEIGER LEWIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
*****
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
Clowney is hereby notified of his 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?