IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Ryane Wallace, C/A No. 4:19-cv-1993-JFA-TER

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER Ryan Lauper, Arteem Korikov, and Kim Olszewski,

Defendants.

The pro se plaintiff, Ryane Wallace (“Plaintiff”), brought this action pursuant to

alleging violations of his civil and constitutional rights. On October 9, 2019, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 18). Plaintiff failed to respond after receiving a Roseboro Order on October 10, 2019. (ECF No. 19). In accordance with

(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d) (D.S.C.), the matter was referred to the Magistrate Judge for review. The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action1 prepared a thorough Report and Recommendation (“Report”) and opines that this Court should dismiss this action for failure to prosecute. The Report sets forth, in detail, the relevant facts and standards of law on this matter, and this Court incorporates those facts and standards without a recitation.

1 The Magistrate Judge’s review is made in accordance with

(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.). 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,

(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

(b). Plaintiff was advised of his right to object to the Report, which was entered on the docket on December 23, 2019. (ECF No. 22). The Magistrate Judge required Plaintiff to file objections by January 6, 2019. Jd. However, Plaintiff failed to file any objections or otherwise respond. 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,

(4th Cir. 1983). After carefully reviewing the applicable laws, the record in this case, and the Report, this Court finds the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation fairly and accurately summarizes the facts and applies the correct principles of law. Therefore, the Report is incorporated herein by reference. (ECF No. 22). Consequently, Plaintiffs claims are dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. IT IS SO ORDERED. peg Cader tons January 13, 2020 Joseph F. Anderson, Jr. Columbia, South Carolina United States District Judge