Dowty v. Brennan et al

Filing 57

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant; granting 43 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim and DISMISSING this action against Defendant Craven. This order does not effect Plaintiffs claims against Defendant Brennan. Signed by Honorable Richard M Gergel on 10/23/2015.(cwhi, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Jeremiah C. Dowty,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
James K. Brennan and Christopher Craven, )
)
Defendants.
)

No. 2: 14-cv-4733-RMG

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R & R) of the
Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 54), recommending that Defendant Craven's motion to dismiss (Dkt.
No. 43) be granted. Plaintiff was advised of his right to file objections to the R & R and a
failure to file timely objections would result in limited review by the District Court and waiver of
the right to appeal the judgment of the District Court. (Dkt. No. 54 at 12). Plaintiff filed no
timely objection to the R & R.
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. 261,270-71 (1976). The Court may "accept, reject, or
modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate." 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). This Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those
portions of the R & R or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is
made. Diamond v. Colonial Life & Ace. Ins. Co., 416 F 3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1»; accord Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). However, as to portions of the R & R to
which no objection is made, this Court "must 'only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the
1

face of the record in order to accept the recommendation. m Diamond v. Colonial Life & Ace.

Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310,315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P 72 advisory committee note).
Additionally, the Court need not give any explanation for adopting the R & R in the absence of
specific objections by the parties. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198,200 (4th Cir. 1983)
("Absent objection, we do not believe that any explanation need be given for adopting the
report.").
The Court has reviewed the Complaint in this matter, the R & R of the Magistrate Judge
and the relevant case law. The Magistrate Judge ably and thoroughly addressed the factual and
legal issues in this matter and correctly concluded that Defendant Craven's motion to dismiss
should be granted. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS the R & R of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No.
54) as the order of the Court, GRANTS Defendant Craven's motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 43) and
DISMISSES this action against Defendant Craven. This order does not effect Plaintiffs claims
against Defendant Brennan.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

United States District Judge
October 'lJ., 2015
Charleston, South Carolina

2