Barnett v. Collins
Filing
16
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant. This matter is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. Signed by Honorable Cameron McGowan Currie on 5/5/2016.(cwhi, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
BEAUFORT DIVISION
James Joseph Barnett,
C/A. No. 9:16-301-CMC
Plaintiff
v.
Tony Collins, Warden, in his Official
And Individual Capacity,
Opinion and Order
Defendant.
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s pro se complaint, filed in this court pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. ECF No. 1.
In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 (B)(2)(d), DSC, this
matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant for pre-trial proceedings
and a Report and Recommendation (“Report”). On April 12, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued a
Report recommending that this matter be dismissed due to multiple grounds: failure to exhaust
administrative remedies, failure to prosecute, and failure to state a claim. ECF No. 14. The
Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the
Report and the serious consequences if he failed to do so. Plaintiff has filed no objections, the
time for doing so has expired, and Plaintiff’s copy of the Report has not been returned to the
court.
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. See Matthews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de
novo determination of any portion of the Report of the Magistrate Judge to which a specific
objection is made.
The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the
recommendation made by the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge
with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The court reviews the Report only for clear error in
the absence of an objection. See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310,
315 (4th Cir. 2005) (stating that “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.”) (citation omitted).
After reviewing the record of this matter, the applicable law, and the Report and
Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, the court agrees with the conclusion of the Report that
this matter should be dismissed without prejudice on multiple grounds, including failure to
exhaust administrative remedies, failure to prosecute, and failure to state a federal claim.
Accordingly, the court adopts and incorporates the Report and Recommendation by reference in
this Order. This matter is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of
process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Cameron McGowan Currie
CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE
Senior United States District Judge
Columbia, South Carolina
May 5, 2016
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?