Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:07-1774-HFF-GCK.
June 16, 2008
ORDER
This case was filed as a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting that Defendant's motion for summary judgment be granted and Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment be denied. 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 May 30, 2008, and the Clerk of Court entered Plaintiff's objections to the Report on June 10, 2008. The Court has reviewed the objections, but finds them to be without merit. Therefore, it will enter judgment accordingly.
After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard set forth above, the Court overrules Plaintiff's objections, adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of this Court that Defendant's motion for summary judgment be GRANTED and Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment be DENIED.
The dismissal of this action is without prejudice as to Plaintiff's right to seek relief pursuant to the applicable habeas corpus statute.