Adams v. Conway Chrysler Dodge Jeep Inc et al

Filing 20

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge 16 is adopted and incorporated by reference. Therefore, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to remand is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 4/14/2015. (mcot, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION
Sandra L. Adams,
Plaintiff,
v.
Conway Chrysler Dodge Jeep, Inc.
and George Gianakouros,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No.: 4:14-cv-3947-RBH-KDW

ORDER

Plaintiff Sandra L. Adams filed this action in the Court of Common Pleas for Horry County
against Defendants Conway Chrysler Dodge Jeep, Inc. and George Gianakouros on July 25, 2014.
See Compl., ECF No. 1-1. On October 10, 2014, Defendants removed the action to this Court, see
ECF No. 1, and filed a partial motion to dismiss, see ECF No. 5. Plaintiff subsequently filed a
motion to remand on November 3, 2014. See ECF No. 10. Plaintiff also filed a response in
opposition to Defendants’ partial motion to dismiss, but primarily reiterated her arguments in
support of remand rather than addressing the merits of Defendants’ motion. See generally ECF no.
11. Defendants then filed a response in opposition to the motion to remand and a reply in support
of their motion to dismiss on November 17, 2014.1 See Def.’s Resp., ECF No. 12; Def.’s Reply,
ECF No. 13.

1

As the Magistrate Judge noted in her March 26, 2015 Text Order, while Plaintiff submitted what
purported to be a response to Defendants’ motion to dismiss, she largely reiterated her arguments in
support of remand in that filing. See Text Order, ECF No. 17. Plaintiff did not respond
substantively to Defendants arguments. See id. Accordingly, the Magistrate Judge only addressed
Plaintiff’s motion to remand in her Report and Recommendation, and gave Plaintiff until May 4,
2015 to submit a substantive response, warning that failure to do so could result in Defendants’
motion to dismiss being granted. See id.

The matter is now before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (“R &
R”) 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. See R & R, ECF No. 16. In
the Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court deny Plaintiff’s
motion to remand. See id. 5.
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.

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
by reference. Therefore, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to remand is DENIED.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ R. Bryan Harwell
R. Bryan Harwell
United States District Judge
Florence, South Carolina
April 14, 2015

3