Finch v. McCormick Correctional Institution et al

Filing 64

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The court adopts and incorporates the Report and Recommendation 57 by reference into this order. It is therefore ORDERED that the Defendants motion for summary judgment 45 is GRANTED. Signed by Honorable Mary G Lewis on 07/12/2012.(dsto)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION

Profit J. Finch, # 308703,,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
McCormick Correctional
)
Institution: Warden Rushton;
)
Assistant Warden Cartledge;
)
Captain Bush, Ms. Riley, Case
)
Worker,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)

Civil Action No. 4:11-858-JMC-MGL

OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983,
Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq., and the
Rehabilitation Act (RA), 29 U.S.C. § 791, et seq. This matter is before the court on Defendants’
motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 45. ) In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local
Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d), DSC, this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Thomas
E. Rogers, III for pre-trial proceedings and a Report and Recommendation. On June 15, 2012,
Magistrate Judge Rogers issued a Report recommending that Defendants’ motion for summary
judgment be granted. (ECF No. 57.) The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of the procedures and
requirements for filing objections to the Report and Recommendation and the serious consequences
if he failed to do so. Plaintiff has 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, 96 S.Ct. 549, 46 L.Ed.2d 483 (1976). The court is charged

with making a de novo determination of any portion of the Report and Recommendation 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). The court reviews the Report and
Recommendation only for clear error in the absence of an objection. See Diamond v. Colonial Life
& Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir.2005) (stating that “in 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.”) (citation
omitted).
After a thorough review of the record of this matter, the applicable law, and the Report and
Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, the court finds no clear error. Accordingly, the court
adopts and incorporates the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 57) by reference into this order.
It is therefore ORDERED that the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Mary G. Lewis
United States District Judge
July12, 2012
Florence, South Carolina