Major v. Pate et al

Filing 50

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court hereby ACCEPTS the Report. (ECF No. 45 ). The Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, (ECF No. 34 ), and the within action is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by Honorable Mary G Lewis on 12/6/2013. (mcot, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Matthew Major,

) Civil Action No. 5:13-457-MGL
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v.
)
)
OPINION AND ORDER
John Pate, Thomas E. Byrne, and Arthur Jordan,
)
)
Defendants. )
_____________________________________ )
)
Plaintiff Matthew Major (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §

1983 against Defendants alleging violations of his constitutional rights. (ECF No. 1).
In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to
United States Magistrate Judge Kaymani D. West for pretrial handling. On November 13, 2013,
Magistrate Judge West entered a Report and Recommendation (“Report”) recommending that Defendants’
Motion for Summary Judgment, (ECF No. 34), be granted and that this action be dismissed with prejudice
for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with Court orders, pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 45). Objections to the Report were due by December 2, 2013.
Plaintiff has filed no objections. This Court therefore applies the following standard.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no
presumptive weight. The responsibility for making a final determination remains with this Court. Mathews
v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270, 96 S.Ct. 549, 46 L.Ed.2d 483 (1976). The Court may accept, reject, or
modify, in whole or in part, the Report and Recommendation or may recommit the matter to the Magistrate
Judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 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).
Based upon the foregoing, and after careful review of the record, the applicable law, and Magistrate
Judge West’s Report, the Court hereby ACCEPTS the Report. (ECF No. 45). The Defendants’ Motion
for Summary Judgement is GRANTED, (ECF. No. 34), and the within action is hereby DISMISSED
with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Mary G. Lewis
United States District Judge
December 6, 2013
Spartanburg, South Carolina