Opinion
C. A. 5:24-1143-JD-KDW
05-17-2024
Rasheed Muhammad, a/k/a Rasheed Abdullah Muhammad, #HC06022322595, a/k/a James Lee Johnson, Plaintiff, v. Florence County Sheriff's Dept.; Florence County Detention Ctr; and Ofc. Ms. McFadden, Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
KAYMANI D. WEST, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Rasheed Muhammad (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed this action while being detained at the Florence County Detention Center. On March 28, 2024, the court ordered Plaintiff to complete service documents for the Defendants named in his case. ECF No. 9. Plaintiff was warned that the failure to provide the necessary information within a specific time period may subject his case to dismissal. Id. The March 28 order was mailed to Plaintiff at the Florence County Detention Center which is the address that was listed on his Complaint. ECF No. 11. On April 1, 2024, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Change of Address with the court directing the court to forward his mail to 705 Layton Street. ECF No. 12. The court re-mailed a copy of the March 28 order to Plaintiff's new address on April 2, 2024. ECF No. 13. On April 9, 2024, the March 28 order that was initially sent to Plaintiff was returned to the court as undeliverable with the notation “Return to Sender, Released, UTF.” ECF No. 14. The proper form order that was re-mailed to Plaintiff at the new address he provided to the court has not been returned to the court, accordingly, Plaintiff is presumed to have received the proper form order. Because Plaintiff has failed to file a response to the March 28 order, the undersigned presumes Plaintiff is no longer interested in prosecuting his action, and recommends this action be dismissed without prejudice in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).
The Clerk of Court is directed to send this Report and Recommendation to Plaintiff at his last known address. If Plaintiff notifies the court within the time set for filing objections to this Report and Recommendation that he wishes to continue with this case and provides a current address, the Clerk is directed to vacate this Report and Recommendation and return this file to the undersigned for further handling. If, however, no objections are filed, the Clerk shall forward this Report and Recommendation to the district judge for disposition.
IT IS SO RECOMMENDED.
The parties are directed to note the important information in the attached “Notice of Right to File Objections to Report and Recommendation.”
Notice of Right to File Objections to Report and Recommendation
The parties are advised that they may file specific written objections to this Report and Recommendation with the District Judge. Objections must specifically identify the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections are made and the basis for such 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 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory committee's note).
Specific written objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days of the date of service of this Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); see Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a), (d). Filing by mail pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5 may be accomplished by mailing objections to:
Robin L. Blume, Clerk
United States District Court
Post Office Box 2317
Florence, South Carolina 29503
Failure to timely file specific written objections to this Report and Recommendation will result in waiver of the right to appeal from a judgment of the District Court based upon such Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984).