Paddock v. Nash

Filing 20

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 18 Report and Recommendations, that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the Court's orders. Signed by Honorable Henry F. Floyd on 10/21/08. (kmca)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ANDERSON/GREENWOOD DIVISION STEPHEN CHARLES PADDOCK, Plaintiff, vs. RAY NASH, Sheriff, Defendant. § § § § § § §

CIVIL ACTION NO. 8:08-1705-HFF

ORDER This case was filed as a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 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 that the action be dismissed with prejudice for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the Court's orders. 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 September 25, 2008, but Plaintiff failed to file any objections to the Report. In the absence of such objections, the Court is not required to give any

explanation for adopting the recommendation. Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). 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 that the action be DISMISSED with prejudice for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the Court's orders, pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the factors outlined in Chandler Leasing Corp. v. Lopez, 669 F.2d 919, 920 (4th Cir. 1982). IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed this 21st day of October, 2008, in Spartanburg, South Carolina.

s/ Henry F. Floyd HENRY F. FLOYD UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ***** NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within 30 days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

2