Dowdle v. Sheriff Bill Blanton et al

Filing 16

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 12 Report and Recommendations, that plaintiff's complaint is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. The court further notes, as did the Magistrate Judge, that Plai ntiff has filed numerous actions in the last several months, some of which contain identical claims. Plaintiff is cautioned that his continued filing of claims that are frivolous, malicious, or fail to state a claim on which relief may be granted could result in the imposition of a "strike" pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Signed by Honorable Margaret B Seymour on 5/28/10. (kmca)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA J o h n Ray Dowdle, aka John R. Dowdle, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v s. ) ) Sheriff Bill Blanton; Chief Joel Hill; ) Lt . Kenny Brown; Capt. Harold Crocker; ) S g t. Blackwell; Sgt. Spencer; Sgt. Parker; ) S g t. Rhinehart; Sgt. Holly; Cpl. Luna; ) C p l . Polk; Cpl. Price; Cpl. Huggins; ) C p t . Ms. Blackwell; Pt. Padgett; Pt. Bishop; ) P t . Dennis; Pt. Queen; Pt. Phillips; ) P t . Hyatt; Pt. Smith; Pt. Bolin; ) P t . Henderson; Pt. Watts; Pt. Lemmonds; ) P t . Kennedy; Pt. Vinsett; Pt. Estes; ) P t . Manning; Pt. Jennings; Pt. Whisnast; ) P t . Bridges; Pt. Green; Pt. Wicks; ) P t. Wiebusch; Pt. Blanton, ) ) D e fe n d a n t s . ) ____________________________________)

C/A No. 6:10-0821-MBS

ORDER

P l a i n t i ff John Ray Dowdle is a pretrial detainee at the Cherokee County Detention Center in G a ffn e y, South Carolina. Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 o n April 2, 2010, alleging that his constitutional rights had been violated in various respects. 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 William M. Catoe for pretrial handling. The Magistrate Judge re v ie w e d the complaint pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915, 1915A, and the Prison Litiga tio n Reform Act of 1996. On April 30, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and R e c o m m e n d a tio n in which he recommended that the complaint be dismissed because, among other t h i n g s , Plaintiff's claims are duplicative of claims raised by Plaintiff in two other cases currently

p e n d in g in this court. See Dowdle v. Crocker, C/A No. 6:10-31-MBS-WMC; Dowdle v. Blanton, C / A No. 6:10-390-MBS-WMC. Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report and Recommendation. T h e Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has n o presumptive weight. The responsibility for making a final determination remains with this court. M a th e w s v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo d e t e r m i n a t io n of any portions of the Report and Recommendation to which a specific objection is m a d e . The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the M a gis tra te Judge 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 r e v i e w , but instead must "only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in o rd e r to accept the recommendation." Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315

(4th Cir. 2005).
The court has carefully reviewed the record and adopts the Report and Recommendation. P l a in t iff's complaint is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. T h e court further notes, as did the Magistrate Judge, that Plaintiff has filed numerous actions in the la s t several months, some of which contain identical claims. Plaintiff is cautioned that his continued filin g of claims that are frivolous, malicious, or fail to state a claim on which relief may be granted c o u l d result in the imposition of a "strike" pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). I T IS SO ORDERED.

/ s / Margaret B. Seymour United States District Judge C o l u m b ia , South Carolina M a y 28, 2010.

2

N O T I C E OF RIGHT TO APPEAL P l a i n tif f is hereby notified of the right to appeal this order pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

3