Gilmore v. Coakley
Filing
15
ORDER authorizing the Clerk to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. Signed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 7/29/2016. (mwal)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Tyganda Gilmore, #13255-171,
)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
v.
)
)
Mr. Joe Coakley,
)
)
Respondent.
)
______________________________________ )
C/A No. 1:16-1587-JFA-SVH
ORDER
The pro se petitioner, Tyganda Gilmore, is an inmate at the United States Penitentiary
McCreary in Pine Knot, Kentucky. He brings this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241
wherein he challenges a detainer he claims is lodged against him in Richland County, South
Carolina.
The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action1 has prepared a Report and
Recommendation and opines that this matter should be transferred to the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. The Magistrate Judge correctly suggests
that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2243, the proper party respondent is the person who has custody
of the detained party. See also Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426 (2004). The Report sets
1
The Magistrate Judge’s review is made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil
Rule 73.02. The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no
presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the court. Mathews
v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions
of the Report and Recommendation 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 to the
Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
1
forth in detail the relevant facts and standards of law on this matter, and the court
incorporates such without a recitation.
The petitioner was advised of his right to file objections to the Report and
Recommendation which was entered on the docket on June 17, 2016. The petitioner filed
a letter with the court noting that he sent the court certain forms and to notify the court of his
new address at Pine Knot. However, the petitioner did not filed specific objections to or
make mention of the Report and Recommendation. In the absence of specific objections to
the Report 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).
After carefully reviewing the applicable laws, the record in this case, and the Report
and Recommendation, this court finds the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation fairly and
accurately summarizes the facts and applies the correct principles of law and it is
incorporated herein by reference.
Accordingly, the Clerk is authorized to transfer this action to the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
July 29, 2016
Columbia, South Carolina
Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge
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?