District Court, D. South Carolina, 2026

Trentius Tucker v. S.A. Evans, Major Hendrix, Sgt. Richburg, Aj Hill

Trentius Tucker v. S.A. Evans, Major Hendrix, Sgt. Richburg, Aj Hill
District Court, D. South Carolina · Decided January 20, 2026
Trentius Tucker v. S.A. Evans, Major Hendrix, Sgt. Richburg, Aj Hill

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA Trentius Tucker, C/A No.: 3:25-cv-12855-SAL Plaintiff, v. ORDER S.A. Evans, Major Hendrix, Sgt. Richburg, Aj Hill, Defendants.

Plaintiff Trentius Tucker, proceeding pro se, filed this action alleging violations of his civil rights. This matter is before the court on the Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) issued by United States Magistrate Judge Paige J. Gossett made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.), recommending the complaint be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with a court order and failure to prosecute. [ECF No. 8.] The Report included a notice advising Plaintiff of his right to file objections, the deadline for doing so, and the consequences of inaction. Id. at 2. He did not file 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).

Finding no clear error in the Report, ECF No. 8, it is adopted and incorporated.

Accordingly, this action is SUMMARILY DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

IT ISSO ORDERED.

January 20, 2026 Sherri A. Lydon Columbia, South Carolina United States District Judge

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.