Summary
explaining that when a litigant fails to ask for relief the court is faced with rendering an advisory opinion, which it may not do
Summary of this case from Felton v. South Carolina Dep't of Corr. Div. of ClassificationOpinion
C.A. No.: 2:09-cv-02889-RBH.
December 15, 2009
ORDER
This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Robert S. Carr, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) 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. SeeMathews 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). "In 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 and Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory committee's note).
Neither party filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. The Report and Recommendation was placed in U.S. mail to the Plaintiff on November 10, 2009. Subsequently, the envelope containing the Report and Recommendation was returned as "undeliverable" on November 19, 2009. The Plaintiff has not provided the court with an updated address as required by the order of November 10, 2009, and, as a result, the court has no means of contacting him concerning the case. 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 finds no clear error. Accordingly, the court adopts Magistrate Judge Carr's Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein. It is therefore
ORDERED that this case is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.