Verderosa v. Municipality of Greenville County et al

Filing 35

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION adopting 32 Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed. Defendant's motion for summary judgment is terminated as moot. Signed by Honorable Mary G Lewis on 4/27/2015. (gpre, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Marc Kendell Verderosa,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Municipality of Greenville County, John
Vandersmosen,
Defendants.
_______________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 8:14-3942-MGL

ORDER

On October 14, 2014, the Plaintiff, Marc Kendell Verderosa, (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro
se, brought this civil action seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1). The
matter now comes before this Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (“the
Report”) filed by Magistrate Judge Jacquelyn D. Austin, to whom this case had previously been
assigned.

In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends that Plaintiff’s complaint be

dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
and other cited authorities. (ECF No. 32). Objections to the Report were due by April 20, 2015.
Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report.
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept,
reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that Report. 28 U.S.C. §
636. In the absence of objections to the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge,
this Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby
v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983).

The Court has carefully reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation.
For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED, (ECF No. 32), and Plaintiff’s complaint
is thereby DISMISSED.

Additionally, in light of the foregoing, Defendants’ Motion for

Summary Judgment, (ECF No. 26), is properly terminated as MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

____s/Mary G. Lewis____
United States District Judge

April 27, 2015
Columbia, South Carolina