Opinion
Civil Action No.: 1:13-cv-00032-TLW
05-01-2013
Marie Assa'ad-Faltas, MD, MPH, Petitioner, v. The State of South Carolina; and the City of Columbia, South Carolina, Respondents.
ORDER
Petitioner, Marie Assa'ad-Faltas ("petitioner"), brought this civil action pro se, seeking habeas relief on January 3, 2013. (Doc. #1).
This matter now comes before this Court for review of the Report and Recommendations ("the Report") filed by United States Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges, to whom this case had previously been assigned. (Doc. #11) In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the case be dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. (Doc. #11). Petitioner filed Objections to the Report. (Doc. #14).
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636. In conducting this review, the Court applies the following standard:
The magistrate judge makes only a recommendation to the Court, to which any party may file written objections...The Court is not bound by the recommendation of the magistrate judge but, instead, retains responsibility for the final determination. The Court is required to make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. However, the Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as toWallace v. Housing Auth. of the City of Columbia, 791 F. Supp. 137, 138 (D.S.C. 1992) (citations omitted).
those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which no objections are addressed. While the level of scrutiny entailed by the Court's review of the Report thus depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, the Court is free, after review, to accept, reject, or modify any of the magistrate judge's findings or recommendations.
In light of the standard set forth in Wallace, the Court has reviewed, de novo, the Report and the Objections. After careful consideration of the Report and Objections thereto, the Court ACCEPTS the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. (Doc. #11). Therefore, for the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, this action is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.
The Court has reviewed this petition in accordance with Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Proceedings. The Court concludes that it is not appropriate to issue a certificate of appealability as to the issues raised herein. Petitioner is advised that she may seek a certificate from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals under Rule 22 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
___________
Terry L. Wooten
Chief United States District Judge
May 1, 2013
Columbia, South Carolina