Ladson v. State

Full title: Carl Ladson, #252891, Plaintiff, v. The State of South Carolina; The South…

Court: United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Beaufort Division

Date published: Sep 9, 2008

C.A. No. 9:08-2844-HMH-GCK (D.S.C. Sep. 9, 2008)

Opinion

C.A. No. 9:08-2844-HMH-GCK.

September 9, 2008

OPINION ORDER

HENRY HERLONG JR., District Judge

This matter is before the court with the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge George C. Kosko, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (2006) and Local Rule 73.02 of the District of South Carolina.¹ Carl Ladson ("Ladson"), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks damages from the Defendants alleging they were responsible for holding him past his sentence max-out date. In his Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Kosko recommends dismissing the case without prejudice and without issuance of service of process.

1 The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility for making a final determination remains with the United States District Court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (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. The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the magistrate judge or recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (2006).

Ladson filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. Objections to the Report and Recommendation must be specific. Failure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of a party's right to further judicial review, including appellate review, if the recommendation is accepted by the district judge.See United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 n. 4 (4th Cir. 1984). In the absence of specific objections to the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge, this court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation.See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983).

Upon review, the court finds that Ladson's objections are non-specific, unrelated to the dispositive portions of the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation, and merely restate his claims. Therefore, after a thorough review of the magistrate judge's Report and the record in this case, the court adopts Magistrate Judge Kosko's Report and Recommendation.

Therefore, it is

ORDERED that this case is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

The Plaintiff is hereby notified that he has the right to appeal this order within thirty (30) days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.