Winters v. United States

Filing 48

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant and granting 34 Motion to Dismiss and granting 34 Motion for Summary Judgment. This action is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 8/16/2011.(cwhi, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
David Winters,
Plaintiff,
vs.
United States of America,
Defendant.
_______________________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No. 9:10-2700-JFA-BM

ORDER

The pro se plaintiff, David Winters, brings this action pursuant to the Federal Tort
Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. § 1346, et seq. He is an inmate at the Federal Bureau of
Prisons. Among other things, the plaintiff contends that the defendant, through its agents and
employees, has been grossly negligent regarding the plaintiff’s medical care and treatment.
The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action 1 has prepared a Report and
Recommendation and opines that the defendant’s motion for summary judgment should be
granted. The Report sets forth in detail the relevant facts and standards of law on this matter,
and the court incorporates such without a recitation.
The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. An order was then issued
pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975) notifying plaintiff of the
summary dismissal procedure and possible consequences if he failed to adequately respond

1

The Magistrate Judge’s review is made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule
73.02. The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no
presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the court. Mathews
v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (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 to the
Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

1

to the motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff responded to the motion.
The plaintiff was also advised of his right to file objections to the Report and
Recommendation, which was entered on the docket on July 14, 2011. However, the plaintiff
did not file any objections to the Report within the time limits prescribed.2 In the absence
of specific objections to the Report 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).
After a careful review of the record, the applicable law, and the Report and
Recommendation, the court finds the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation proper and
incorporated herein by reference. Accordingly, the defendant’s motion to dismiss and for
summary judgment (ECF No. 34) is granted and this action is dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge

August 16, 2011
Columbia, South Carolina

2

On July 14, 2011, a copy of the Report and Recommendation was mailed to the plaintiff. On July 22, 2011,
the plaintiff advised the court of his new address and the Clerk remailed another copy of the Report to the
plaintiff at his new address. The deadline to file objections has now passed with no response from the
plaintiff.

2