Washington v. Pratt et al
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations of Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant; granting 19 Motion to Dismiss; granting 20 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Honorable Richard M Gergel on 5/3/2017.(cwhi, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Sean Washington, #337465,
RN Pratt, RN Stokes, C/O, McDaniels,
RN Montgomery, and Sgt. Colcough,
Case No 9: 16-cv-32 18-RMG
ORDER AND OPINION
Sean Washington ("Plaintiff'), proceeding pro se, filed this action alleging that Defendants
violated his constitutional rights while he was an inmate with the South Carolina Department of
Corrections. This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("R. & R.") of
the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 28) to grant Defendants' motions to dismiss the action (Dkt. Nos.
19, 20) because the action is barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
The Magistrate mailed the R. &R. to Plaintiff on April 14,2017. (Dkt.No. 29.) Plaintiffs
Objections to the R. & R. were due by April 28, 2017, but under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
6, Plaintiff had an additional three days (until May 1, 2017) to file his objections to the R. & R
because it was served by mail. As of May 2, 2017, no objections to the R. & R. had been filed.
While this Court will conduct a de novo review of any portion of the R. & R. to which a specific
objection is made, it appears Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual
and legal conclusions of the Magistrate absent objection by any party. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(I);
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). This Court's review of the record indicates that the R. &
R. accurately analyzes the facts of this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, this Court
adopts the Magistrate's R. & R. as the Order of this Court. Defendants' motions to dismiss (Dkt.
Nos. 19, 20) are GRANTED.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
Richard Mark Gergel
United States District Court Judge
Charleston, South Carolina
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?