Monge v. Lexington County Jail Medical et al

Filing 63

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Report and Recommendation 54 of the Magistrate Judge is adopted and incorporated by reference. Therefore, it is ORDERED that Defendant's motion for summary judgment 42 is GRANTED and this action is dismissed. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 04/14/2015. (dsto, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION
Alcides Agustin Alvarez Monge,
Plaintiff,
v.
Dr. William Miles,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No.: 4:14-cv-1250-RBH

ORDER

Plaintiff Alcides Agustin Alvarez Monge, proceeding pro se,1 filed this action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendant Dr. William Miles (“Defendant”) on April 8, 2014. See Compl.,
ECF No. 1. On January 26, 2015, Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. See Def.’s
Mot., ECF No. 42. On February 13, 2015, Plaintiff filed a response in opposition. See Pl.’s Resp.,
ECF No. 46. After receiving an extension from the Court, Defendant filed a reply in support of his
motion on March 2, 2015. See Def.’s Reply, ECF No. 52.
The matter is now before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United
States Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers, III, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)
and Local Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina. See R & R, ECF No. 54. In the Report and
Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge recommends the Court grant Defendant’s motion for

1

At the time Plaintiff filed this action, he was incarcerated at the Stewart Detention Center in
Lumpkin, GA. See ECF No. 1 at 3. He was later transferred to the Houston Processing Center of
the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. See Notice of Change of Address, ECF No.
11. After the Magistrate Judge issued his R & R, Plaintiff submitted another change of address
form indicating that his new mailing address is: 19390 Collins Ave. PH8, Sunny Isles Beach,
Florida 33160, which appears to be a private address. The R & R was re-mailed to this address, but
returned to the Court as undeliverable on April 9, 2015. Accordingly, it is unclear whether Plaintiff
is still incarcerated and what his proper mailing address is.

summary judgment due to Plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies and dismiss this
action. See id. at 8.
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).
No party has filed objections to the Report and Recommendation.2 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 recommendations. 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

2

The Magistrate Judge issued his R & R on March 9, 2015. See ECF No. 54. Therefore, objections
to the R & R were originally due by March 26, 2015. As noted above, however, on March 16, 2015
the Court received a notice of change of address from Plaintiff. See ECF No. 56. Therefore, the
Court re-mailed the R & R to this new address on March 16, 2015. See Notice, ECF No. 57.
Accordingly, the Court calculated the deadline for filing objections from the re-mailing date,
moving the deadline to file objections to April 2, 2015. As of the date of this Order, the Court has
received no additional filings from Plaintiff.
2

by reference. Therefore, it is ORDERED that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is
GRANTED and this action is dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ R. Bryan Harwell
R. Bryan Harwell
United States District Judge
Florence, South Carolina
April 14, 2015

3