Summary
In Taylor v. Gainey, C/A No. 0:05-1850-HMH-BM, 2006 WL 1083439 (D.S.C. Apr. 18, 2006), the court relied on S.C. Code Ann. § 24-21-670 in adopting the report and recommendation and granting Defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim where a parolee requested the court relieve her from a period of parole for the remainder of her life.
Summary of this case from James v. Sumter Cnty.Opinion
C.A. No. 0:05-1850-HMH-BM.
April 18, 2006
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local 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 this 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, 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. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report and Recommendation. 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 (4th Cir. 1983).
After a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation and the record in this case, the court adopts Magistrate Judge Marchant's Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein. It is therefore
ORDERED that the Defendants' motion is granted, and this case is dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.