Robertson v. GEO Care of South Carolina Inc et al

Filing 26

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: the court finds the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to be proper. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation 19 is incorporated herein by reference, Plaintiff's motion to Withdraw (ECF No. 22 ) is GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. Signed by Honorable Mary G Lewis on 10/31/2013. (mcot, )

Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) Civil Action No.: 4:13-cv-01341-MGL ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ORDER AND OPINION ) Geo Care of South Carolina Inc.; Ron ) Laurenz; Cynthia McFadden; Bruce ) McClease, ) ) Defendants. ) _________________________________ ) James Buford Robertson, Plaintiff James Buford Robertson is an inmate in custody at the Columbia Regional Care Center in Columbia, South Carolina. On May 20, 2013, Plaintiff proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 D.S.C., this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers, III, for pretrial handling. On August 22, 2013, Judge Rogers issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the court dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. (ECF No. 19.) 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 may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The court may also receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. Id. The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objections are made. In lieu of objections, Plaintiff filed a “Motion to Withdraw” in this case on September 11, 2013, “to withdraw this civil action (4:13-cv-01341-MGL) against Defendants mentioned above.” (ECF No. 22.) After a careful review of the record, the applicable law, the Report and Recommendation, and Plaintiff’s motion to withdraw, the court finds the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation to be proper. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation is incorporated herein by reference, Plaintiff’s motion to Withdraw (ECF No. 22) is GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Mary G. Lewis United States District Judge Spartanburg, South Carolina October 31, 2013 2

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?