Martin v. Edwards et al

Filing 20

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 14 . The action is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance of service of process. Signed by Honorable Mary G Lewis on 5/31/2013. (kric, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
)
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs.
)
)
Tommy B. Edwards; Cathy M. Phillips,
)
)
Defendants. )
_______________________________________ )

Willie Lewis Martin, Jr.,

Civil Action No.: 8:13-763-MGL

ORDER AND OPINION

Plaintiff Willie Lewis Martin, Jr. (“Plaintiff”), proceeding, pro se and in forma pauperis,
filed this civil action against Tommy B. Edwards and Cathy M. Phillips (“Defendants”) on March
22, 2013. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff complains of alleged constitutional violations that occurred while
he was incarcerated in the South Carolina Department of Corrections. In accordance with 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B) D.S.C., this matter was referred to United States
Magistrate Judge Kevin F. McDonald for pretrial handling. On April 12, 2013, Magistrate Judge
McDonald issued a Report and Recommendation recommending inter alia that the Court dismiss
Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice and without issuance of service of process because
Defendants are entitled to judicial and quasi-judicial immunity. (ECF No. 14.)
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 this Court.
See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1). The Court may also receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the Magistrate
Judge with instructions. Id. The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those
portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objections are made. Plaintiff was

advised of his right to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. (ECF No. 14 at 6.) On
April 17, 2013, Plaintiff filed a letter with the Court which appears to be a form letter he composed
to send to attorneys in an effort to obtain counsel (ECF No. 17), but failed to file any objections to
the Report and Recommendation and the time for doing so expired on April 29, 2013. 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).
After a careful review of the record, the applicable law, and the Report and
Recommendation, the Court finds the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation to be proper.
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated herein by reference and
this action is DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance of service of process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/Mary G. Lewis
United States District Judge

Spartanburg, South Carolina
May 31, 2013

-2-