Hawkins v. Holland et al

Filing 10

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION adopting 6 Report and Recommendation and transferring Plaintiff's case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. Signed by Honorable Mary G Lewis on 8/26/2014. **Clerk's Note: The Plaintiff is advised the address for the Clerk of Court for the US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky is 101 Barr Street, Lexington, KY 40507. (jpet, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
AIKEN DIVISION
BRANDON D. HAWKINS, SR.
Plaintiff,
vs.
USP WARDEN J.C. HOLLAND;
CASE MANAGER MS. JAMENSON; and
COUNSELOR MR. LAWSON,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§ CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:14-2037-MGL-SVH
§
§
§
§
§

ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND TRANSFERRING PLAINTIFF’S CASE
This case was filed as a Bivens action. Plaintiff 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 that Plaintiff’s case be transferred to the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Kentucky. 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 May 29, 2014, 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.3d 310, 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 this Court that Plaintiff’s case is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Kentucky.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 26th day of August, 2014, in Spartanburg, South Carolina.

s/ Mary G. Lewis
MARY G. LEWIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

*****
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
Plaintiff is hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within sixty days from the date
hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

2