Smith v. Brown

Aug 31, 2026

6:26-cv-01074

ORDER

Plaintiff, a self-represented state pretrial detainee, brings this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter is before the court for review of a Report and Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Kevin F. McDonald (the “Report“), made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B) (D.S.C.). [ECF No. 29.] The Report recommends dismissal of this action because Plaintiff fails to allege facts supporting a plausible § 1983 claim. Id. at 4–10. Attached to the Report was a notice advising Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the consequences of failing to respond. Id. at 11. 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. 29, it is adopted and incorporated. For the reasons discussed in the Report, this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WITHOUT FURTHER LEAVE TO AMEND, AND WITHOUT ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF PROCESS.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sherri A. Lydon

United States District Judge