Robinson v. Clark et al
Filing
129
ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. The court ACCEPTS the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. Dkt. No. 109 . It is therefore ORDERED that Sgt. J. Aranda is DISMISSED without prejudice in the above listed case in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Signed by Honorable J Michelle Childs on 10/15/2012. (mcot, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ORANGEBURG DIVISION
Corey Jawan Robinson, # 294233,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
Cpt. T. Clark; Ms. D. Bailey, Classification; )
Lt. J. Williams; Officer S. Mosher;
)
Sgt. J. Aranda; Lolita M. Lee; Sherisse
)
D. Birch; Loretta Aiken; Warden Wayne
)
McCabe; IGC B. J. Thomas;
)
Ofc. J. Middleton; Ofc. Jeremy Johnson;
)
Nurse Luanne Mauney; Nurse J. Scott;
)
Ann Hallman; Ofc. Tabitha Ford;
)
Ms. S. Jones; Cpt.William Brightharp;
)
Major Thierry Nettles; Assoc.Warden Fred )
Thompson; and Cpt. Ann Sheppard,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)
Civil Action No. 5:12-cv-00502-JMC
ORDER
This matter is before the court for review of the Magistrate Judge's Report and
Recommendation (“Report”), [Dkt. No. 109], filed on September 7, 2012, recommending that Sgt.
J. Aranda be dismissed without prejudice as a defendant in the above listed case, in accordance with
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Plaintiff brought this action seeking relief pursuant to Title 42 U.S.C. §1983.
The Report sets forth in detail the relevant facts and legal standards on this matter which the court
incorporates herein without a recitation.
The Magistrate Judge's Report is made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local
Civil 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
1
to which specific objections are made, and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in
part, the Magistrate Judge's recommendation or recommit the matter with instructions. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1).
Plaintiff was advised of his right to file objections to the Report [Dkt. No. 109 at 3].
However, Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report.
In the absence of objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report, this court is not required to
provide an explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199
(4th Cir. 1983). Rather, "in the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct
a 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.'" Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d
310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note). Furthermore,
failure to file specific written objections to the Report results in a party's waiver of the right to
appeal from the judgment of the District Court based upon such recommendation. 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985);
United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984).
After a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation and the record in this case, the
court ACCEPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. [Dkt. No. 109]. It is
therefore ORDERED that Sgt. J. Aranda is DISMISSED without prejudice in the above listed case
in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
United States District Judge
Greenville, South Carolina
October 15, 2012
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?