Thompson v. The Lasik Vision Institute
Filing
26
ORDER adopting 22 Report and Recommendation. It is the judgment of the Court Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 2/7/2017.(abuc)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
GREENVILLE DIVISION
QUATANDREYAH THOMPSON,
Plaintiff,
vs.
THE LASIK VISION INSTITUTE,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Civil Action No. 6:16-03169-MGL
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE
This is an employment discrimination action. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. The matter is
before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States
Magistrate Judge suggesting to the Court this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to
prosecute and failure to comply with the Magistrate Judge’s December 8, 2016, Order. The Report
was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 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 the
Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo
determination of those portions of the Report to which specific objection is made, and the Court
may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge or
recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on January 18, 2017, ECF No. 22, but Plaintiff failed
to file any objections to the Report. “[I]n 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). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841,
845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).
After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard
set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the
judgment of the Court Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 7th day of February 2017 in Columbia, South Carolina.
s/ Mary Geiger Lewis
MARY GEIGER LEWIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
*****
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from the
date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
2
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?