Case Information
*1 9:05-cv-03351-CMC Date Filed 01/25/06 Entry Number 6 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA John T. Bragg, # 162788, ) C/A No. 9:05-3351-CMC-GCK
)
Plaintiff, )
) v. ) OPINION AND ORDER
)
J. Reuben Long Detention Center, )
Tom Fox; and Phillip Thompson, )
)
Defendants. )
____________________________________ )
The pro se Plaintiff was an inmate at J. Reuben Long Detention Center in Horry County, South Carolina when he filed this civil rights complaint concerning conditions of confinement for detainees at the detention center. In accordance with the court’s order of reference, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Local Rule 73.02 (B)(2)(e), D.S.C., this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge George C. Kosko for pre-trial proceedings and a Report and Recommendation.
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 the court. See Mathews v. Weber , 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of any portion of the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge to which a specific objection is made. The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The court reviews only for clear error in the absence of an objection. See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co. , 416 F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2005) (stating that “ in the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct 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.’” ) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note).
On December 12, 2005, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the complaint *2 9:05-cv-03351-CMC Date Filed 01/25/06 Entry Number 6 Page 2 of 2 be dismissed without prejudice and without service of process. The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and Recommendation and the serious consequences if he failed to do so. Plaintiff has filed no objections and the time for doing so has expired.
The court has reviewed the record and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and finds no clear error. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process .
IT IS SO ORDERED .
s/ Cameron McGowan Currie CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Columbia, South Carolina
January 25, 2006
C:\temp\notesE1EF34\05-3351 Bragg v. J. Reuben Long - dism wo svc - no objs.wpd
2