Gonzalez-Martinez v. Drew

Filing 35

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. The court adopts the Magistrate Judges Report and Recommendation, the Respondents Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and the Petition is DENIED. 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. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 1/11/2012. (kric, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ANDERSON/GREENWOOD DIVISION
Hugo Gonzalez-Martinez,

)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
v.
)
)
Darlene Drew, Warden,
)
)
Respondent.
)
_______________________________ )

C/A No. 8:11-437-TMC

OPINION and ORDER

Petitioner, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Dkt. # 1). This matter is before the
Court on Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative, Motion for Summary
Judgment. (Dkt. # 21). In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule
73.02(B)(2)(e), D.S.C., all pre-trial proceedings were referred to a Magistrate Judge.
On December 16, 2011, Magistrate Judge Jacquelyn D. Austin issued a Report and
Recommendation ("Report") recommending that Respondent’s Motion for Summary
Judgment be granted and the Petition be denied. (Dkt #. 32). The Magistrate Judge
provided Petitioner a notice advising him of his right to file objections to the Report.
(Dkt. # 32-1).

However, Petitioner filed no objections to the Report and

Recommendation.
In the absence of objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation, this court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the
recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Rather, “in
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). Furthermore, failure to file specific written objections to the Report and
Recommendation results in a party’s waiver of the right to appeal from the judgment of
the District Court based upon such recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Thomas
v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985); United
States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984).
After a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation and the record in
this case, the court adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Dkt. #
32) and incorporates it herein. It is therefore ORDERED that the Respondent’s Motion
for Summary Judgment (Dkt. # 21) is GRANTED and the Petition is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Timothy M. Cain
United States District Judge
January 11, 2012
Greenville, 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.

2