Singleton v. Patel et al

Filing 53

ORDERADOPTING 43 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, granting Defendants' 30 Motion for Summary Judgment, and dismissing this case with prejudice. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 12/9/08. (rpol, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA BEAUFORT DIVISION ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) Dr. Patel, Nurse Floyd and Warden Eagleton ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) Arthur Singleton, #300109,

C.A. No.: 9:07-04055-RBH

ORDER

This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local 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 this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation 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. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Report and Recommendation was filed on October 27, 2008 and mailed to the plaintiff on the same date. Objections to the Report were thus due on November 14, 2008. Plaintiff made a timely request for an extension of time to file objections, and the Court granted the plaintiff an extension of time until November 28, 2008. The Court received the objections on December 4, 1

2008. The envelope containing the objections bears the stamp of the prison mailroom indicating it was received by the mailroom on December 2, 2008. Therefore, the objections were not timely filed. In the absence of timely 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). In addition, the Court has reviewed the objections and finds them to be without merit. After a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation and the record in this case, the court adopts Magistrate Judge Marchant's Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein. It is therefore ORDERED that the defendants' motion for summary judgment [docket entry #30] is hereby GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ R. Bryan Harwell R.Bryan Harwell United States District Judge Florence, South Carolina December 9, 2008

2