Case Information
*1 1:25-cv-00133-MGL Date Filed 04/25/25 Entry Number 14 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA AIKEN DIVISION
JAMES MUHAMMAD, §
Plaintiff, § vs. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:25-133-MGL
§
§
AIKEN COUNTY, STATE OF SOUTH §
CAROLINA, AIKEN COUNTY §
DETENTION CENTER, and §
KEYSTONE KNIGHTS OF S.C., §
Defendants. § ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WITHOUT ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF PROCESS, AND WITHOUT FURTHER LEAVE FOR AMENDMENT
Plaintiff James Muhammad (Muhammad) filed this lawsuit against the above-listed defendants. He is representing himself.
The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting to the Court the complaint be dismissed without prejudice, without issuance and service of process, and without further leave for amendment. 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 a recommendation 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
1:25-cv-00133-MGL Date Filed 04/25/25 Entry Number 14 Page 2 of 2 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 14, 2025, but Muhammad 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, and incorporates it herein. It is therefore the judgment of the Court the complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE , without issuance and service of process, and without further leave for amendment.
IT IS SO ORDERED .
Signed this 25th day of April, 2025, in Columbia, South Carolina.
/s/ Mary Geiger Lewis MARY GEIGER LEWIS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE *****
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Muhammad 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.
2