Williams v. US Attorney General et al
ORDER ACCEPTING 25 Report and Recommendations; DENYING 12 Motion for TRO filed by Erick D Williams; This Petition for Habeas Corpus isDISMISSED without prejudice. Signed by Honorable Terry L Wooten on 5/31/2012. (mbro, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Erick D. Williams,
Warden John Owens,
C.A. No. 6:12-26-TLW-KFM
This matter is now before the undersigned for review of the Report and Recommendation
(“the Report”) filed by United States Magistrate Kevin F. McDonald, to whom this case had
previously been assigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.). In
his Report, Magistrate Judge McDonald recommends that the Petition for Habeas Corpus in this case
be dismissed without prejudice. It is further recommended that Petitioner’s Motion for a Temporary
Restraining Order (Doc. # 12) be denied. The Report was filed on April 11, 2012. Plaintiff has filed
no objections to the Report.
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate
Judge’s Report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636. 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 recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th
A review of the record indicates that the Report accurately summarizes this case and the
applicable law. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, it is hereby ORDERED that
the Magistrate Judge’s Report is ACCEPTED (Doc. # 25) and this Petition for Habeas Corpus is
DISMISSED without prejudice. Additionally, Petitioner’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining
Order (Doc. # 12) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Terry L. Wooten
TERRY L. WOOTEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
May 31, 2012
Florence, South Carolina
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?