From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jones v. Hamidullah

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
Dec 12, 2005
C/A No. 6:05-0439-DCN-WMC (D.S.C. Dec. 12, 2005)

Opinion

C/A No. 6:05-0439-DCN-WMC.

December 12, 2005


ORDER


The above referenced case is before this court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that the Respondents' Motion To Dismiss or, in the Alternative for Summary Judgment be granted and this petition be dismissed.

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(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge's report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1208 (1984). Objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation were filed on December 7, 2005.

In Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985), the court held "that a pro se litigant must receive fair notification of the consequences of failure to object to a magistrate judge's report before such a procedural default will result in waiver of the right to appeal. The notice must be `sufficiently understandable to one in appellant's circumstances fairly to appraise him of what is required.'" Id. at 846. Plaintiff was advised in a clear manner that his objections had to be filed within ten (10) days, and he received notice of theconsequences at the appellate level of his failure to object to the magistrate judge's report.

A de novo review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the magistrate judge's report and recommendation is affirmed, the Respondents' Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative for Summary Judgment is granted, and this petition is dismissed.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Jones v. Hamidullah

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
Dec 12, 2005
C/A No. 6:05-0439-DCN-WMC (D.S.C. Dec. 12, 2005)
Case details for

Jones v. Hamidullah

Case Details

Full title:CORNELIUS JONES, #09109-021, Petitioner, v. MATTHEW HAMIDULLAH, WARDEN OF…

Court:United States District Court, D. South Carolina

Date published: Dec 12, 2005

Citations

C/A No. 6:05-0439-DCN-WMC (D.S.C. Dec. 12, 2005)