Opinion
Civil Action No. 9:06-2462-SB.
July 10, 2007
ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon the Plaintiff's pro se complaint seeking declaratory and injunctive relief from the above-captioned Defendant. By local rule, the matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge for preliminary determinations.
On June 12, 2007, United States Magistrate Judge George C. Kosko issued a report and recommendation ("R R") analyzing the Plaintiff's complaint and recommending that the Court grant the Defendant's motion for summary judgment. Attached to the R R was a notice advising the parties of the right to file specific, written objections to the R R within 10 days of the date of service of the R R. To date, no objections have been filed.
Absent timely objection from a dissatisfied party, a district court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, a Magistrate Judge's factual or legal conclusions.Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985); Wells v. Shriner's Hosp., 109 F.3d 198, 201 (4th Cir. 1997). Here, because the Plaintiff did not file any specific, written objections, there are no portions of the R R to which the Court must conduct a de novo review. Accordingly, the Court hereby adopts the Magistrate Judge's R R as the Order of this Court, and it is
ORDERED that the Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 33) is granted, and this matter is ended.
IT IS SO ORDERED.