Doe v. Doctors Care, P.A.
ORDER adopting 24 Report and Recommendation and dismissing this action without prejudice and without issuance and service of process under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 5/31/2017. (mwal)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
JAMES JOHN TODD KINCANNON,
DOCTORS CARE, P.A.,
Civil Action No. 3:17-00669-MGL-SVH
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND
WITHOUT ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF PROCESS
Plaintiff has asserted a claim against Defendant for violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act and various state law claims. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. The matter is before
the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate
Judge suggesting this action be dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of
process under Federal Civil Procedure Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute. The Report was made
in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Civil Rule 73.02 for the District of South
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation
has no presumptive weight. The responsibility to make a final determination remains with the
Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (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 with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on May 16, 2017, ECF No. 24, but Plaintiff failed
to file any objections to the Report. “[I]n 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.’” Diamond v. Colonial
Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory
committee’s note). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766
F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).
After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard
set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the
judgment of the Court this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT
ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF PROCESS under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 31st day of May 2017 in Columbia, South Carolina.
s/ Mary Geiger Lewis
MARY GEIGER LEWIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from
the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
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?