Davis v. Buchanan

Filing 12

ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, dismissing this action without prejudice and without service of process, for 10 Report and Recommendation, Signed by Honorable Mary G Lewis on September 10, 2012. (kbos)

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
COLUMBIA DIVISION
Jerry Davis, #270224,

) Civil Action No.: 3:12-1729-MGL
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs.
)
ORDER AND OPINION
)
Miss Buchanan,
)
)
Defendant. )
__________________________________
Plaintiff Jerry Davis is an inmate in custody of the South Carolina Department of
Corrections (SCDC). He is currently housed at the Evans Correctional Institution in
Bennettsville, South Carolina. On June 27, 2012, Plaintiff proceeding pro se, filed this civil
rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 due to his dissatisfaction with food provided to
him because there was hair in his food on May 20, 2012 and May 21, 2012. He also
complains about a soft food diet and the lack of meat. (ECF No. 1). In accordance with
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 D.S.C., this matter was referred to United
States Magistrate Judge Joseph R. McCrorey for pretrial handling. On July 30, 2012,
Magistrate Judge McCrorey issued a Report and Recommendation recommending inter
alia that the court dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice and without service due
to Plaintiff’s failure to exhaust his administrative remedies.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court.
recommendation has no presumptive weight.

The

The responsibility to make a final

determination remains with this court. See 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 Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The court may

also receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with
instructions. Id. The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those
portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objections are made.
Plaintiff was advised of his right to file objections to the Report and Recommendation.
(ECF No. 10 at 7). However, he has not done so. 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 and
Recommendation, the court finds the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation to be proper.
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation is incorporated herein by reference and this
action is DISMISSED without prejudice and without service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Mary G. Lewis __
United States District Judge

Spartanburg, South Carolina
September 10, 2012

2