Mullinax v. Martin

Filing 42

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court, ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. No. 31 ), as the order of this Court. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion (Dkt. No. 11 ) is DENIED. Signed by Honorable Richard M Gergel on 12/11/2014. (dsto, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION Preston Mullinax, Plaintiff, vs. Lt. James Martin, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No.4:I4-cv-2047 ORDER ) This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R & R) of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 31), recommending that Plaintiffs Motion for Temporary Restraining OrderlInjunctive Relief (Dkt. No. 11) be denied. No party has filed objections to the R & R. For the reasons stated below, the Court ADOPTS the R & R and DENIES Plaintiffs motion. I The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final detennination remains with the Court. 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." 28 U.S.c. § 636(b)(I). This Court is charged with making a de novo detennination of those portions of the R & R to which specific objection is made. Here, however, because no objection has been made, this Court "must 'only satisfy itselfthat there is no clear error on the face of the This matter is stayed pursuant to the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act because Defendant Martin is currently serving on active duty in the military. (Dkt. Nos. 35, 38). The deadline for Plaintiff to object to the R & R passed without objection before the Court stayed the case. Because the Court's Order in no way affects the rights Defendant Martin, the Court issues this Order despite the stay. I record in order to accept the recommendation. '" Diamond v. Colonial Life & Ace. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P 72 advisory committee note). Moreover, in the absence of specific objections to the R & R, the Court need not give any explanation for adopting the Magistrate Judge's analysis and recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198,200 (4th Cir. 1983). After reviewing Plaintiffs motion, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that Plaintiff has failed to specify the relief that he seeks; therefore, the Court cannot grant any relief. The Court also agrees that Plaintiff has failed to show the four Winter factors. THEREFORE, the Court, ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. No. 31), as the order of this Court. Accordingly, Plaintiffs (Dkt. No. 11) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. United States District Judge J.L, December 2014 Charleston, South Carolina -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?