Opinion
C/A No. 0:09-2580-JFA-PJG.
August 6, 2010
ORDER
The pro se plaintiff, Terrence Jerome Hardy, brings this action pursuant 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that the defendants violated his constitutional rights regarding religious freedom. At the time of the filing of this action, he was incarcerated at the South Carolina Department of Corrections.
The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action has prepared a thorough Report and Recommendation and opines that the complaint should be dismissed for failure to prosecute, in accordance with Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss and the court advised the plaintiff in a Roseboro order of the importance of his adequate response to the motion. Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975). Plaintiff did not respond. The Magistrate Judge issued another order on June 11, 2010 requesting that the plaintiff advise the court if he wished to continue with the prosecution of this action and allowing him fifteen additional days to respond to the defendants' motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff did not respond.
The Magistrate Judge's review is made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02. 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 the court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation 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 to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The plaintiff was also advised of his right to file objections to the Report and Recommendation, which was entered on the docket on July 8, 2010. However, the plaintiff did not file any objections to the Report within the time limits prescribed.
The Magistrate Judge has reviewed the matter and finds that plaintiff meets all of the criteria for dismissal under Chandler Leasing Corp. v. Lopez, 669 F.2d 919 (4th Cir. 1982).
After a careful review of the record, the applicable law, and the Report and Recommendation, the court finds the Magistrate Judge's recommendation proper and incorporated herein by reference. Accordingly, this action is dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.