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

Myra Horan ) C/A No. 1:22-01422-SAL ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ORDER Vicki J. Snelgrove, Family Court Judge, ) ) Defendant. ) ) ) )

This matter is before the court for review of the May 3, 2022 Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) of United States Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges, made in accordance with

(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C). [ECF No. 6.] In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends dismissing this case against Defendant based on her judicial immunity. See

at 4–5. The Magistrate Judge also recommends denying Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order, ECF No. 3, seeking to enjoin Defendant from enforcing an order or exercising jurisdiction over Plaintiff.

Attached to the Report was a notice advising Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious consequences if she failed to do so.

. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the Report, and the time for doing so has expired. 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, ECF No. 6, and incorporates the Report by reference herein. As a result, Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order, ECF No. 3, is DENIED and Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant are DISMISSED. IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/Sherri A. Lydon June 9, 2022 Sherri A. Lydon Florence, South Carolina United States District Judge