Opinion
Civil Action No.: 2:07-4160-TLW-TER.
September 4, 2008
ORDER
Plaintiff, Thomas Green, ("plaintiff") brought this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. #1). On January 4, 2008, the magistrate judge to whom this case was previously assigned requested that the case be brought into proper form. (Doc. #13). The plaintiff responded by answering the Court's special interrogatories. (Doc. #15).
This matter now comes before this Court for review of the Report and Recommendation ("the Report") filed by United States Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers, III, to whom this case had previously been assigned. (Doc. #18). In the Report, Magistrate Judge Rogers recommends that the District Court dismiss the complaint without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. (Doc. #18). The plaintiff was put on notice that he may file objections to the Report. However, the plaintiff has not filed any objections. Objections to the Report were due March 10, 2008.
In conducting review of the plaintiff's previous objections, 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 to 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.Wallace v. Housing Auth. of the City of Columbia, 791 F. Supp. 137, 138 (D.S.C. 1992) (citations omitted).
In light of the Wallace standard, the Court has carefully reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED (Doc. #18) and the action is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.