Benjamin Powell v. Scotty Bodiford

District Court, D. South Carolina

Benjamin Powell v. Scotty Bodiford

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Benjamin Powell, C/A No. 1:25-cv-12699-SAL

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER Scotty Bodiford,

Defendant.

This matter is before the court on the Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) issued by United States Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges made in accordance with

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.). The Report recommends this case be summarily dismissed for many reasons, including that it fails to meet the minimal pleading requirements and fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. [ECF No. 13.] 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 he failed to do so.

Id. at 10

. Plaintiff has not filed objections, 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,

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 reviewing the Report, the applicable law, and the record of this case in accordance with the above standard, the court finds no clear error and adopts the Report, ECF No. 13, and incorporates it by reference herein. As a result, this matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT LEAVE FOR FURTHER AMENDEMENT. IT IS SO ORDERED. Sherr xX. December 5, 2025 Sherri A. Lydon Columbia, South Carolina United States District Judge

Reference

Status
Unknown