Curtis S. Crummie v. Robert Hill Lake and Sequoya D. Lee

GSES DSR Sa 3 nS Rorsp IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ORANGEBURG DIVISION CURTIS S. CRUMMIE, § Plaintiff, § § vs. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:25-7683-MGL § ROBERT HILL LAKE, and SEQUOYA D. § LEE, § Defendant. § ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, AS PROVIDED HEREIN, AND DISMISSING THE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff Curtis S. Crummies (Crummie), who is self-represented, filed this action against Defendants Robert Hill Lake, and Sequoya D. Lee (Defendants).

The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting to the Court it decline to give Crummie leave to amend and dismiss this action against Defendants without prejudice. The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Civil Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina.

The Magistrate Judge makes only arecommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight. The responsibility to make a final determination remains with the Court.

Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report to which specific objection is made, and the Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on January 20, 2026, but Crummie failed to file any objections. “[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead 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) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).

After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard set forth above, the Court adopts the Report to the extent it is consistent with this Order and incorporates those portions herein. It is therefore the judgment of the Court the action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

The Magistrate Judge suggests the Court disallow Crummie to amend his complaint. But, the applicable rules and law allow plaintiffs to amend their complaint once, as a matter of right.

Therefore, because Crummie has failed to amend his complaint, the Court declines to adopt that portion of the Report.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Signed this 27th day of February, 2026, in Columbia, South Carolina.

/s/ Mary Geiger Lewis MARY GEIGER LEWIS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

***** NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Crummie is hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.