Summary
granting summary judgment in favor of an employer who called the plaintiff a "stupid f*****g b***h" because the comment "was not sufficiently severe or pervasive" under Title VII
Summary of this case from CAMPBELL-THOMSON v. COX COMMUNICATIONSOpinion
C/A No. 3:06-1274-MBS.
April 11, 2007
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Mary Kay Fry brought this action in state court, alleging that her former employer, Defendant American Italian Past Company, violated her rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq.; and under 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Defendants removed the case on April 28, 2006.
This matter is before the court on motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants on October 16, 2006 (Entry 25). On October 19, 2006, an order was issued pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), advising Plaintiff of the summary judgment procedure and the possible consequences if she failed to respond adequately. Plaintiff failed to respond to the motion for summary judgment.
In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant for pretrial handling. On March 19, 2007, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation in which he recommended that Defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted. Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report and Recommendation.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight. The responsibility for making a final determination remains with this court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of any portions of the Report and Recommendation to which a specific objection is made. The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the Magistrate Judge or may recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In the absence of objections to the Report, this court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983).
The court has carefully reviewed the record. The court adopts the Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein by reference. Accordingly, Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Entry 25) is granted.