Snyder v. Dunlap et al

Filing 59

AMENDED ORDER Adopting the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Molly H. Cherry and granting Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 1/7/2022. (cwhi, ) (Main Document 59 replaced on 1/7/2022 to correct signature date) (rshu, ).

9:20-cv-01909-MGL

Date Filed 01/07/22

Entry Number 59

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
BEAUFORT DIVISION
MARK ALLAN SNYDER,
Plaintiff,
vs.
DAVID W. DUNLAP, Warden; LULA
MILLER, Lieutenant; CHARLES J.
ROMANIELLO, Sergeant; and GREGORY
McCOY, Officer,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Civil Action No. 9:20-01909-MGL

AMENDED ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff Mark Allan Snyder (Snyder), proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action
seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the above-named Defendants.
This matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of
the United States Magistrate Judge recommending Defendants’ motion for summary judgment be
granted. The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Civil 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 the
Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo
determination of those portions of the Report to which specific objection is made, and the Court

9:20-cv-01909-MGL

Date Filed 01/07/22

Entry Number 59

Page 2 of 2

may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge or
recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on December 9, 2021, and the Clerk of Court
docketed Snyder’s objections on January 3, 2022. The Court has reviewed the objections, but
holds them to be without merit. It will therefore enter judgment accordingly.
Here, Snyder has wholly failed to bring any specific objections to the Report. Instead, he
merely makes arguments the Magistrate Judge has already considered and rejected. Inasmuch as
the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s treatment of those issues, it need not repeat the
discussion here. Consequently, because Snyder neglects to make any specific objections, and the
Court has found no clear error, it need not make a de novo review of the record before overruling
Snyder’s objections and accepting the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation.
After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard
set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the
judgment of the Court Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED, and Snyder’s
complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 7th day of January 2022, in Columbia, South Carolina.
s/ Mary Geiger Lewis
MARY GEIGER LEWIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
*****
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from the
date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

2