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

Donchez D. Campbell, ) Case No.: 0:25-cv-03917-JD-PJG ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) ORDER AND OPINION J. Reuben Long Detention Center, ) ) Defendant. ) )

This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“Report”) of United States Magistrate Judge Paige J. Gossett (DE 13), issued pursuant to

(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) of the District of South Carolina. The Report addresses Plaintiff Donchez D. Campbell’s (“Plaintiff” or “Campbell”) failure to comply with the Magistrate Judge’s order dated May 15, 2025 (DE 7).1 (DE 13.) A. Background Campbell, a state pretrial detainee proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to

against the J. Reuben Long Detention Center. On May 15, 2025, the court entered an order directing Plaintiff to bring the case into proper form by filing the necessary documents to permit issuance and service of process. The order explicitly warned Plaintiff that failure to comply within the

1 The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility for making a final determination remains with the United States District Court. See 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. The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the magistrate judge or recommit the matter with instructions.

(b)(1). prescribed time would result in dismissal for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with a court order, pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff did not respond, and the deadline for compliance has expired.

On May 15, 2025, the United States Magistrate Judge issued a Proper Form Order requiring Plaintiff to file the documents necessary to bring this case into proper form for the issuance and service of process. (DE 7.) Plaintiff failed to cure the deficiencies within the time permitted. (DE 13.) B. Report and Recommendation In the Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge determined that

Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the court’s May 15, 2025, order and prosecute this matter warrants dismissal. The Report notes that the court has inherent authority, as recognized in Link v. Wabash R.R. Co.,

(1962), to dismiss an action sua sponte for lack of prosecution, and that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) expressly authorizes dismissal for failure to comply with a court order. The Magistrate Judge found that Plaintiff ignored a clear, express warning that noncompliance would result in dismissal. Relying on Ballard v. Carlson,

(4th Cir. 1989), and Lutfi v. Training Etc., Inc.,

(4th Cir. 2019), the Report concludes that dismissal without prejudice is appropriate, as Plaintiff may refile the action if he chooses to pursue it. Accordingly, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the case be summarily dismissed without prejudice and without issuance or service of process. Campbell did not object to the Report. C. Legal Standard In the absence of objections to the Report and Recommendation, this Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis,

(4th Cir. 1983). The Court 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). D. Conclusion Since Plaintiff has not objected, after a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation and the record in this case, the Court finds no clear error on the face of the record. Thus, the Court adopts the Report (DE 13) and incorporates it here by reference. It is, therefore, ORDERED that Plaintiffs action is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with a court order, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). IT IS SO ORDERED.

Joséph Dawson, III United States District Judge Florence, South Carolina August 18, 2025

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this order within thirty (30) days from this date under Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.