Wilder v. Haley et al
Filing
54
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, denying plaintiff's motions to strike and granting defendants'motion for summary judgment. This matter is dismissed with prejudice, for 52 Report and Recommendation, Signed by Honorable Cameron McGowan Currie on June 20, 2013. (kbos)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
COLUMBIA DIVISION
Samuel L. Wilder,
#258295,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
William Byars, in his official capacity as
)
Commissioner of South Carolina
)
Department of Corrections, SCDC; Wayne )
McCabe, in his official capacity as Warden )
at Lieber Correctional Institution; Linda
)
Jones, in her official capacity as Nurse at
)
Lieber Correctional Institution Health
)
Service,
)
)
Defendants.
)
___________________________________ )
C/A NO. 3:12-1743-CMC-JRM
OPINION and ORDER
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s pro se complaint, filed in this court pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983.
In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 (B)(2)(d), DSC, this matter
was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Joseph R. McCrorey for pre-trial proceedings and a
Report and Recommendation (“Report”). On May 31, 2013, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report
recommending that Plaintiff’s motions to strike (ECF Nos. 26 and 51) be denied, Defendant’s motion
for summary judgment be granted, and this matter be dismissed with prejudice. 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. Plaintiff has filed no objections and the time for doing so has
expired.
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.
1
See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo
determination of any portion of the Report of the Magistrate Judge to which a specific objection is
made. The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the
Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. §
636(b). The court reviews the Report only for clear error in the absence of an objection. See
Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (stating that “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.”) (citation omitted).
After reviewing the record of this matter, the applicable law, and the Report and
Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, the court agrees with the conclusions of the Magistrate
Judge. Accordingly, the court adopts and incorporates the Report and Recommendation by reference
in this Order. Plaintiff’s motions to strike (ECF Nos. 26 & 51) are denied, Defendants’ motion for
summary judgment (ECF No. 28) is granted, and this matter is dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Cameron McGowan Currie
CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Columbia, South Carolina
June 20, 2013
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?