From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kincannon v. Howland

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION
May 4, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-866-MGL-SVH (D.S.C. May. 4, 2017)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-866-MGL-SVH

05-04-2017

JAMES JOHN TODD KINCANNON, Plaintiff, v. NICOLE HOWLAND, in her personal capacity; ANONYMOUS MEDIA SOURCES, as described herein; WILLIAM R. FOLKS, III; FITSNEWS, LLC; and FITSNEWS, INC., Defendants.


ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITHOUT ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF PROCESS

This case was filed as a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting the Court dismiss the complaint without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Civil Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina.

The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight. The responsibility to make a final determination remains with the Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report 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 with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on April 14, 2017, but Plaintiff failed to file any objections. "[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must 'only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.'" Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).

After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case employing the standard set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of this Court the complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and without issuance and service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Signed this 4th day of May, 2017, in Columbia, South Carolina.

/s/ Mary G. Lewis

MARY G. LEWIS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

*****

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

Plaintiff is hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

Kincannon v. Howland

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION
May 4, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-866-MGL-SVH (D.S.C. May. 4, 2017)
Case details for

Kincannon v. Howland

Case Details

Full title:JAMES JOHN TODD KINCANNON, Plaintiff, v. NICOLE HOWLAND, in her personal…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION

Date published: May 4, 2017

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-866-MGL-SVH (D.S.C. May. 4, 2017)