Fuller v. Exel Logistics et al
ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 14 . It is the judgment of this Court Defendants Ashley Emde, Arthur Hughes, Dave Brinager, and Sarah Olnufe are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE from this action and without issuance and service of process. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 8/24/2017. (kric, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
EXEL LOGISTICS; ASHLEY EMDE;
ARTHUR HUGHES; DAVE BRINAGER;
and SARAH OLNUFE,
Civil Action No. 7:17-01692-MGL-KFM
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING
DEFENDANTS EMDE, HUGHES, BRINAGER, AND OLNUFE WITHOUT
PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF PROCESS
This case was filed as 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 Defendants Ashley Emde, Arthur Hughes, Dave
Brinager, and Sarah Olnufe be dismissed from this action without prejudice and without issuance
and service of process. 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 August 7, 2017, 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 this Court Defendants Ashley Emde, Arthur Hughes, Dave Brinager, and Sarah
Olnufe are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE from this action and without issuance and
service of process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 24th day of August, 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.
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?