Frazier v. Wal-Mart

Filing 76

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION granting 49 Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by Wal-Mart Stores East LP, adopting 64 Report and Recommendation. Signed by Honorable Mary G Lewis on 10/31/12. (alew, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
GREENVILLE DIVISION
COREY L. FRAZIER,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
v
)
)
Wal-Mart,
)
)
Defendant.
)
______________________________)

CA No. 6:11-1434-MGL
OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation
(“Report”) (ECF No. 64.). The Magistrate Judge's Report, filed on May 24, 2012, recommends that
Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 49) be granted. The Report sets forth in detail
the relevant facts and legal standards on this matter, and the Court incorporates the Magistrate
Judge's recommendation herein without a recitation.
The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation 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, 96 S.Ct. 549, 46 L.Ed.2d 483 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo
determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation 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)..
Objections to the Report must be specific. Failure to file specific objections constitutes a
waiver of a party's right to further judicial review, including appellate review, if the recommendation

is accepted by the district judge. See United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 & n. 4 (4th
Cir.1984). In the absence of specific objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report, this Court is not
required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d
198, 199 (4th Cir.1983).
Plaintiff filed objections (ECF No. 67 ) to the Magistrate Judge’s Report. The Court finds
that Plaintiff's objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report are not specific objections, but are merely
almost verbatim restatements of the arguments made in previously ruled upon discovery motions.
Plaintiff’s objections do not alert the Court to matters which were erroneously considered by the
Magistrate Judge. The Court finds that the Magistrate Judge prepared an extensive and detailed
Report and appropriately addressed Plaintiff’s prior arguments.
Accordingly, after a thorough review of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation
and the record in this case, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff’s objections
are overruled. Therefore, it is hereby ordered that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is
GRANTED
It is so ORDERED.

/s/ Mary G. Lewis
United States District Judge
October 31, 2012
Spartanburg, South Carolina