Floyd v. Richland County et al
ORDER accepting 9 Report and Recommendation and dismissing Plaintiff's claims without prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge Terry L Wooten on 5/8/2017. (mwal)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Raffele J. Floyd,
C/A No. 3:16-cv-02622-TLW
Richland County; Richland County Sheriff
Department; and South Carolina Department
of Motor Vehicles,
Plaintiff Raffele J. Floyd, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this action
alleging violations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. ECF No. 1. The matter
now comes before this Court for review of a Report and Recommendation (R&R) filed by
Magistrate Judge Hodges, ECF No. 9, to whom this case was assigned pursuant to the provisions
of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2), DSC. In the R&R, the Magistrate
Judge recommends that the Court dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint. ECF No. 9. Objections to the R&R
were due on August 22, 2016, and Plaintiff has not filed objections.
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate
Judge’s R&R to which a specific objection is registered and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole
or in part, the recommendations contained in that R&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636. In the absence of
objections to the R&R, this Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the
recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199–200 (4th Cir. 1983).
This Court carefully reviewed the R&R in this case. Noting that Plaintiff filed no
objections, the R&R, ECF No. 9, is hereby ACCEPTED. Therefore, for the reasons articulated by
the Magistrate Judge in the R&R, Plaintiff’s claims are hereby DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Terry L. Wooten
Terry L. Wooten
Chief United States District Judge
May 8, 2017
Columbia, South Carolina
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?