Buckmon v. Brown

District Court, D. South Carolina

Buckmon v. Brown

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ROCK HILL DIVISION

Mr. Michael Paul Buckmon,, Case No.: 0:19-CV-398-SAL

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER CPL Iesha Van Brown,

Defendant.

This matter is before the Court for review of the February 20, 2020 Report and Recommendation (“Report”) of United States Magistrate Judge Paige J. Gossett, made in accordance with

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 (D.S.C.). See ECF No. 91. In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 70, be granted and Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 59, be denied. On March 9, 2020, Plaintiff moved for an extension of time to file objections to the Report. ECF No. 95. The undersigned granted Plaintiff’s request the following day, ECF No. 98; however, he has not filed any objection since, and the time to do so has passed. 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,

423 U.S. 261

, 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.

28 U.S.C. § 636

(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.,

416 F.3d 310, 315

(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, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 70, is GRANTED, Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 59, is DENIED, and this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED.

June 8, 2020 /s/Sherri A. Lydon Florence, South Carolina United States District Judge

Reference

Status
Unknown