Jesus Antonio Higuera-Diaz v. Warden Napier

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA Jesus Antonio Higuera-Diaz, #67681-510, C/A No. 4:26-cv-1326-SAL Petitioner, v. ORDER Warden Napier, Respondent.

Petitioner Jesus Antonio Higuera-Diaz (“Petitioner”), a federal prisoner, filed this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 seeking First Step Act Time Credits. This matter is before the court on the Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) of Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers, III, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.), recommending dismissal of Petitioner’s action without prejudice and without requiring Respondent to file a return. [ECF No. 7.] As explained in the Report, Petitioner has not fully exhausted his claims, nor has he shown that the administrative procedures available are clearly inadequate to prevent irreparable harm. Id. at 4–6. Attached to the Report was a notice advising Petitioner of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious consequences if he failed to do so. Id. at 7. Petitioner 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 a thorough review of the Report, the applicable law, and the record of this case, the court finds no clear error and ADOPTS the Report, ECF No. 7. For the reasons discussed above and in the Report, the petition is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and without requiring Respondent to file a return.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Shear tk. Fp May 27, 2026 Sherri A. Lydon Columbia, South Carolina United States District Judge