Chieves v. United States District Court et al
Filing
27
ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 3 . The Magistrate Judges recommendation proper and incorporated herein by reference. Accordingly, this action is dismissed with prejudice under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute. Signed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 7/17/2013. (kric, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Darrine Chieves,
Plaintiff,
vs.
United States District Court; Richland County;
FBI Agency,
Defendants.
____________________________________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
C/A: 3:13-1152-JFA-KFM
ORDER
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. By Order dated May 12, 2013, Plaintiff was given an opportunity to provide the
necessary information and paperwork to bring the case into proper form for evaluation and
possible service of process. Plaintiff was warned that failure to provide the necessary
information within the timetable set forth in the Order would subject the case to dismissal.
Plaintiff was also advised that he must keep the Clerk advised of his proper address,
however, he failed to notify the Clerk of his address change.
The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action1 has prepared a Report and
Recommendation and opines that the complaint should be dismissed in accordance with Rule
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 and Recommendation 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. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
1
41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Report sets forth in detail the relevant
facts and standards of law on this matter, and the court incorporates such without a recitation
and without a hearing.
The plaintiff was also advised of his right to file objections to the Report and
Recommendation, which was entered on the docket on June 11, 2013. However, the plaintiff
did not file any objections to the Report within the time limits prescribed.
In the 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 a careful review of the record, the applicable law, and the Report and
Recommendation, the court finds the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation proper and
incorporated herein by reference. Accordingly, this action is dismissed with prejudice under
Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute
IT IS SO ORDERED.
July 17, 2013
Columbia, South Carolina
Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge
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?