Kennedy v. South Carolina Department of Labor Licensing and Regulation

Filing 37

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION adopting 32 Report and Recommendation, granting 20 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Honorable Joseph F. Anderson, Jr. on 08/01/2014. (bshr, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
COLUMBIA DIVISION

Lemuel T. Kennedy,

C/A No.: 3:13-cv-00289-JFA
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER

South Carolina Department of Labor Licensing
and Regulation,
Defendant.
Plaintiff Lemuel T. Kennedy (“Plaintiff”) brings the above-captioned case against his
former employer, South Carolina Department of Labor Licensing and Regulation (“Defendant”).
In his complaint, Plaintiff alleges race discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. This matter is before the court on
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 20).
The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action1 has prepared a Report and
Recommendation wherein she recommends that the court grant the Defendant’s motion for
summary judgment. The Report and Recommendation sets forth the relevant facts and standards
of law on this matter, and the court incorporates such without a recitation.
Plaintiff was advised of his right to file objections to the Report and Recommendation,
which was entered on the docket on May 13, 2014.

However, Plaintiff did not file any

objections, even after the court granted Plaintiff an extension of time to file objections. In the
1

The Magistrate Judge’s review is made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02.
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
(1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report to which specific
objection is made and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the
Magistrate Judge, or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

1

absence of specific objections to the Report of the Magistrate Judge, this court is not required to
give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199
(4th Cir. 1983).
After carefully reviewing the applicable laws, the record in this case, and the Report and
Recommendation, this court finds the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation fairly and accurately
summarizes the facts and applies the correct principles of law. The Report is incorporated herein
by reference in its entirety.
Accordingly, Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted. Therefore, the court
dismisses, with prejudice, all of Plaintiff’s claims.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

August 1, 2014
Columbia, South Carolina

Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge

2