McElveen v. Mike Reichenbach Ford Lincoln Inc

Filing 31

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The Report and Recommendation 28 of the Magistrate Judge is adopted and incorporated by reference. Therefore, it is ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay 17 is GRANTED, and this matter is STAYED pending the outcome of the arbitration. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 9/11/2012. (mcot, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION
Angela McElveen,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Mike Reichenbach Ford Lincoln, Inc.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C.A. No.: 4:12-874
ORDER

Plaintiff Angela McElveen filed this action against her former employer Defendant
Mike Reichenbach Ford Lincoln, Inc. alleging causes of action for sexual harassment and
retaliation, pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. On May 30,
2012, pursuant to an arbitration agreement signed by Plaintiff prior to the start of her
employment, Defendant filed a Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Stay. This matter is
before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate
Judge Kaymani D. West, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule
73.02 for the District of South Carolina.
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
this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The court is charged with
making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation 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.
See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
1

Neither party has filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. In the absence
of objections to the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, 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 reviews only for clear error in the absence of an
objection. See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2005)
stating that “in the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct 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.'” (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory
committee's note).
After a thorough review of the record in this case, the Court finds no clear error.
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted and
incorporated by reference. Therefore, it is
ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay [17] is
GRANTED, and this matter is STAYED pending the outcome of the arbitration.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ R. Bryan Harwell
R. Bryan Harwell
United States District Judge
Florence, South Carolina
September 11, 2012

2