Miranda v. Rockwell Medical Tech Inc et al

Filing 21

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 17 . The court adopts the Magistrate Judges Report and Recommendation. It is therefore ORDERED that the Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 10/12/2012. (gpre, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
GREENVILLE DIVISION
Amilcar Miranda,
aka Amilcar Miranda Valentin,

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
Rockwell Medical Tech Inc.; Daniel
)
Baker; Kimberly Gregorio,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_______________________________ )

C/A No. 6:12-1649-TMC
ORDER

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this action June 14, 2012.
(Dkt. # 1). This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation
of the United States Magistrate Judge Kevin F. McDonald 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.
recommendation has no presumptive weight.

The

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 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).
Plaintiff was advised of her right to file objections to the Report and
Recommendation. (Dkt. # 17 at 6). However, Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report
and Recommendation. In the absence of objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report
and Recommendation, 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).
After a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation and the record in
this case, the court adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Dkt. #
17) and incorporates it herein.

It is therefore ORDERED that the Complaint is

DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Timothy M. Cain
United States District Judge
Anderson, South Carolina
October 12, 2012

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this order pursuant to Rules
3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.