IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ORANGEBURG DIVISION

Daryl Robertson, individually and ) C/A No. 5:19-cv-03166-SAL as Personal Representative for the ) Estate of Ralpheal Robertson, ) ) Plaintiff, ) OPINION & ORDER OF REMAND v. ) ) South Carolina Department of Corrections, ) ) ) Defendants. ) ___________________________________ )

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Remand, in which he asserts that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. See ECF No. 9. In accordance with

(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(a) (D.S.C.), the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (“Report”) on December 19, 2019. ECF No. 14. In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommended that Plaintiff’s Motion for Remand be granted. The Magistrate Judge reasoned that because Plaintiff brings claims as a personal representative of a South Carolina citizen, Plaintiff is deemed to be a South Carolina citizen under

(c)(2) for diversity purposes. ECF No. 14 at 3-4. Accordingly, because Defendant is also a South Carolina citizen, the Magistrate Judge recommends that this Court is without subject matter jurisdiction under

. See

No party filed objections to the Report, and the time for response has lapsed. 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 this Court. See Mathews v. Weber,

, 270–71 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of only those portions of the Report that have been specifically objected to, and the Court may accept, reject, or modify the Report, in whole or in part.

(b)(1). In the absence of objections, the Court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the Report and must “only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co.,

(4th Cir. 2005) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note). After a thorough review of the Report, the applicable law, and the record of this case in

accordance with the above standard, the Court finds no clear error, adopts the Report, and incorporates the Report by reference herein. Accordingly, under

(c), this case is hereby REMANDED to the Court of Common Pleas for Lee County, South Carolina. IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Sherri A. Lydon United States District Judge January 21, 2020 Florence, South Carolina