Reynolds v. Cannon et al
ORDER AND OPINION adopting 59 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Mary Gordon Baker; denying 61 Motion to Transfer Case; granting 29 Motion for Summary Judgment. This case is dismissed. Signed by Honorable Bruce Howe Hendricks on 2/21/2017.(ssam, )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Nathanael Lenard Reynolds,
Sheriff Al Cannon, Sgt. Luke, and Officer
Civil Action No. 2:16-512-BHH
ORDER AND OPINION
Plaintiff Nathanael Lenard Reynolds (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, brought this
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) In accordance with 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B), D.S.C., this matter was referred to United States
Magistrate Judge Mary Gordon Baker for pre-trial handling and a Report and
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment
(ECF No. 29). On January 31, 2017, Magistrate Judge Baker issued a Report
recommending that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment be granted as to all
claims against all Defendants. (ECF No. 59.) The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of
the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious
consequences if he failed to do so. (Id. at 15.) Plaintiff filed no objections, but filed a
Motion to Transfer Case to the “Supreme Court of the district of Columbia.” (ECF No.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The
recommendation has no presumptive weight. The responsibility for making a final
determination remains with this Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976).
The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the Report or may recommit
the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 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 recommendation.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416
F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005).
After a careful review of the record, the applicable law, and the Report, the Court
finds the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation to be proper and to evince no clear error.
Accordingly, the Court adopts the recommendation and incorporates the Report herein
by specific reference. Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 29) is
GRANTED and this case is dismissed. Plaintiff’s Motion to Transfer (ECF No. 61) is
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/Bruce Howe Hendricks____
United States District Judge
February 21, 2017
Greenville, South Carolina
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified that any right to appeal this Order is governed by
Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
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?