Kenneth Logan v. Jordan R. Sauls, Medical-FNP-C, Eric McDaniel, Medical-RN

District Court, D. South Carolina

Kenneth Logan v. Jordan R. Sauls, Medical-FNP-C, Eric McDaniel, Medical-RN

Trial Court Opinion

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

Kenneth Logan, C/A No.: 6:25-cv-209-SAL

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER Jordan R. Sauls, Medical-FNP-C, Eric McDaniel, Medical-RN,

Defendants.

Plaintiff Kenneth Logan, a pretrial detainee, filed this action under

42 U.S.C. § 1983

regarding events that occurred while he was detained in the Florence County Detention Center. Defendants Family Nurse Practitioner Jordan R. Sauls and Nurse Supervisor Eric McDaniel moved for summary judgment. [ECF No. 22.] This matter is before the court on the Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) issued by United States Magistrate Judge Kevin F. McDonald, made in accordance with

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.), recommending this court grant Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. [ECF No. 30.] Attached to the Report was a notice advising Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report.

Id. at 15

. 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,

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). Finding no clear error in the Report, ECF No. 30, it is adopted and incorporated. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 22, is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sherr tk. October 15, 2025 Sherri AA □□□ Columbia, South Carolina United States District Judge

Reference

Status
Unknown