McClam v. Chavez

Full title: Leo N. McClam, Plaintiff, v. Jose Chavez, M.D., Defendant

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

Date published: Jun 7, 2006

C.A. No. 3:05-cv-1795-TLW-JRM (D.S.C. Jun. 7, 2006)

Opinion

C.A. No. 3:05-cv-1795-TLW-JRM.

June 7, 2006

ORDER

TERRY WOOTEN, District Judge

This action has been filed by the plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se. This matter is now before the undersigned for review of the Report and Recommendation ("the Report") filed by United States Magistrate Judge Joseph R. McCrorey, to whom this case had previously been assigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.). In his Report, Magistrate Judge McCrorey recommends that the defendant's motion for summary judgment be granted. (Doc. # 17). No objections to the Report have been filed.

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. No objections have been filed to the Report. In the absence of 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 (4^th Cir. 1983).

A review of the record indicates that the Report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. For the reasons set forth and articulated by the Magistrate Judge, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report is ACCEPTED (Doc. # 17), and the defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.