Lorenzo Duane Holmes v. Ofc. Gray, Major Anderson, Sgt. Cook, Cherokee County...

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ORANGEBURG DIVISION Lorenzo Duane Holmes, C/A No.: 5:24-07503-SAL Plaintiff, v. ORDER Ofc. Gray, Major Anderson, Sgt. Cook, Cherokee County Detention Center, Ofc. Page, Defendants.

Plaintiff Lorenzo Duane Holmes, a pretrial detainee, filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 regarding events that occurred while he was detained in the Cherokee County Detention Center. Defendants Ofc. Gray, Major Anderson, Sgt. Cook, Ofc. Page, and the Cherokee County Detention Center moved for summary judgment. [ECF No. 59.] This matter is before the court on the Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) issued by United States Magistrate Kaymani D.

West, 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 Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. [ECF No. 85.]

Attached to the Report was a notice advising Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report. Id. at 16. 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. 85, it is adopted and incorporated.

Accordingly, Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 59, is GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sherr tk.

February 23, 2026 Sherr A. te □□□ Columbia, South Carolina United States District Judge