Wells v. SCDF Defendant Employees et al
ORDER adopting 26 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Mary Gordon Baker. It is therefore ORDERED that Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (ECF No. 23 ) is summarily DISMISSED with prejudice and without issuance and service of process. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 10/14/2016.(ssam, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Ray Edward Wells,
SCDF Warden Larry W. Powers, et al.,
Civil Action No. 2:16-1060-TMC
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In accordance
with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to a
magistrate judge for pretrial handling. Before the court is the magistrate judge’s Report and
Recommendation (“Report”), recommending that the court summarily dismiss Plaintiff’s
Amended Complaint (ECF No. 23) with prejudice and without issuance and service of process.
(ECF No. 26). Plaintiff was advised of his right to file objections to the Report. (ECF No. 26 at
12). However, Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report, and the time to do so has now run.
The Report has no presumptive weight and the responsibility to make a final
determination in this matter remains with this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 27071 (1976). In the absence of objections, this court is not required to provide an explanation for
adopting the Report. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Rather, “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) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note).
After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case, the court adopts the
magistrate judge's Report (ECF No. 26) and incorporates it herein. It is therefore ORDERED
that Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (ECF No. 23) is summarily DISMISSED with prejudice
and without issuance and service of process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Timothy M. Cain
United States District Judge
October 14, 2016
Anderson, South Carolina
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this order pursuant to 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?