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

Charles Anderson, a/k/a Charles S. Anderson C/A No.: 9:25-cv-3993-SAL #99303,

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER South Carolina Department of Corrections, Evans C.I.; Warden Donnie Stonebreaker; Ms. S. Buchannon, Kitchen Supervisor; Sgt. Evans; Ofc. McKenzie,

Defendants.

Charles Anderson (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed this complaint action pursuant to

, alleging violations of his civil rights. [ECF No. 1.] This matter is before the court on the Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) issued by United States Magistrate Judge Molly H. Cherry, made in accordance with

(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.), recommending the complaint be dismissed for multiple deficiencies, including failure to state a claim and failure bring the complaint into proper form. [ECF No. 10.] Attached to the Report was a notice advising Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report.

. Plaintiff has not objected to the Report, and the time to do 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). CONCLUSION 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, Plaintiff's case is DISMISSED without prejudice, without leave to amend, and without issuance and service of process pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41. IT ISSO ORDERED.

Sherr tk. September 16, 2025 Sherri A. ee □□□ Columbia, South Carolina United States District Judge