Jenkins v. United States

Filing 40

ORDER accepting the 34 Report and Recommendation and denying Defendant's 25 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Chief Judge Terry L. Wooten on 4/9/2018. (bgoo)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION Clarence B. Jenkins, Jr., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) United States, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________) C/A No. 3:17-cv-1775-TLW-PJG ORDER Plaintiff Clarence B. Jenkins, Jr., proceeding pro se, filed this action pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671-2680, 1346(b), alleging that Defendant negligently place a suggestion box over sitting chairs. ECF No. 1. On November 20, 2017, Defendant United States filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s claims pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). ECF No. 25. Plaintiff filed a response opposing the motion. ECF Nos. 30, 31. This matter now comes before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (the Report) filed on March 12, 2018, by United States Magistrate Judge Paige J. Gossett, to whom this case was previously assigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civ. Rule 73.02(B)(2), (D.S.C.). In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends denying Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. ECF No. 34. Objections to the Report were due on March 26, 2018. However, Defendant did not file objections to the Report. This matter is now ripe for disposition. This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that Report. 28 U.S.C. § 636. In the absence of objections to the Report, 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). The Court has carefully reviewed the Report and relevant filings, and notes that Defendant did not file objections to the Report. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 34, is ACCEPTED, and Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 25, is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Terry L. Wooten____________ Chief United States District Judge April 9, 2018 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?