Bennett v. Way et al

Filing 34

ORDER RULING ON 32 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 24 Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by LaShawn Peeples, Dennis Bush, Charles Way. It is hereby ordered that the within action be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute and to comply with this courts orders, pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and defendants pending motion for summary judgment is moot. Signed by Honorable Patrick Michael Duffy on 04/12/2017. (egra, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Kevin Tyrone Bennett,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Charles Way, Dennis Bush, and LaShawn
Peeples,
Defendants.

) C.A. #6-16-2682-PMD
)
)
)
)
ORDER
)
)
)
)
)
)

This matter is before the court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that the within
action be dismissed. Because plaintiff is pro se, this matter was referred to the magistrate judge.1
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(b)(1). However, absent
prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court
to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v Arn, 474 U.S. 140
(1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge's
report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate
court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984).2 No objections have been filed

1

Pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 United States Code, § 636(b)(1)(B), and Local
Rule 73.02(B), D.S.C., the magistrate judge is authorized to review all pretrial matters and
submit findings and recommendations to this Court.
2

In Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985), the court held "that a pro se litigant
must receive fair notification of the consequences of failure to object to a magistrate judge's
report before such a procedural default will result in waiver of the right to appeal. The notice
must be sufficiently understandable to one in appellant's circumstances fairly to appraise him of

to the magistrate judge's report.
A review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this
case and the applicable law. Finding no error in the report, this court adopts the report and
recommendation and incorporates it into this order.
For the reasons articulated by the magistrate judge, it is hereby ordered that the within
action be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute and to comply with this court’s orders,
pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and defendants’ pending motion for
summary judgment is moot.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

April 12, 2017
Charleston, South Carolina

what is required.'" Id. at 846. Plaintiff was advised in a clear manner that his objections had to
be filed within fourteen (14) days, and he received notice of the consequences at the appellate
level of his failure to object to the magistrate judge's report.
2