James v. Herin

Filing 43

OPINION AND ORDER adopting 39 Report and Recommendation, granting 32 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Honorable Cameron McGowan Currie on 5/2/2017. (cbru, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
COLUMBIA DIVISION
Vernice L. James,

C/A. No. 3:16-cv-2041-CMC-BM

Plaintiff
v.
United States 1,

Opinion and Order

Defendant.

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s complaint alleging libel and slander pursuant
to the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671, et seq. On February 24, 2017, Defendant filed
a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), arguing lack of subject
matter jurisdiction because there is no waiver of sovereign immunity for intentional torts of slander
and libel. ECF No. 32. A Roseboro Order was mailed to Plaintiff on February 27, 2017, advising
her of the importance of a dispositive motion and the need to file an adequate response. ECF No.
33. Plaintiff filed a response in opposition to the motion to dismiss on April 4, 2017. ECF No.
37.
In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 (B)(2)(g), D.S.C., this
matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant for pre-trial proceedings
and a Report and Recommendation (“Report”). On April 12, 2017, the Magistrate Judge issued a
Report recommending that Defendant’s motion to dismiss be granted and this matter dismissed
with prejudice. ECF No. 39. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties of the procedures and

1

By Order filed March 6, 2017, the United States was substituted as Defendant for Walter Herin,
Jr. See ECF No. 35.

requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious consequences if they failed to do
so. The parties have 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. 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).
After considering the record, the applicable law, and the Report and Recommendation of
the Magistrate Judge, the court agrees with the Report’s recommendation that the complaint should
be dismissed. Accordingly, the court adopts the Report by reference in this Order. Defendant is
entitled to dismissal as to all claims with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Cameron McGowan Currie
CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE
Senior United States District Judge
Columbia, South Carolina
May 2, 2017

2