Martin v. Byars et al

Filing 88

ORDER adopting 84 Report and Recommendation. It is ORDERED that Defendant's 58 Motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 4/23/15. (kmca)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
GREENVILLE DIVISION
Henry J. Martin, Jr.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Cpt. Myecha Miley,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 6:13-cv-3516

ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule
73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to a magistrate judge for pretrial handling. Before the
court is the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (“Report”), recommending that
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment be granted. (ECF No. 84). Plaintiff was advised of
his right to file objections to the Report, and he has filed timely objections. (ECF No. 86).
The Report has no presumptive weight and the responsibility to make a final
determination in this matter remains with this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 27071 (1976). The court need not conduct a de novo review when a party makes only “general and
conclusory objections that do not direct the court to a specific error in the magistrate’s proposed
findings and recommendations.” Orpiano v. Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982). In that
case, the court reviews the Report only for clear error. See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident
Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005).
Plaintiff’s objections fail to address any specific, dispositive portion of the Report. The
objections are non-specific, unrelated to the dispositive portions of the Report, or merely restate

Plaintiff’s claims. The court has thoroughly reviewed the Report and Plaintiff’s objections and
finds no reason to deviate from the Report’s recommended disposition.
Accordingly, the court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report (ECF No. 84) and
incorporates it herein. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendant’s motion for summary
judgment (ECF No. 58) is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Timothy M. Cain
United States District Judge
April 23, 2015.
Anderson, South Carolina

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.