Opinion
Civil Action No. 3:20-cv-1776-CMC
06-30-2020
Andres Glenn, Plaintiff, v. Eal Earl and Marlen Secutary, Defendants.
ORDER
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff's Complaint filed May 4, 2020. ECF No. 1. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 (B)(2)(d), D.S.C., the matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges for pre-trial proceedings. On May 8, 2020, the Magistrate Judge entered two orders, citing deficiencies in Plaintiff's Complaint and allowing an opportunity for amendment and directing Plaintiff to provide proper service documents. ECF Nos. 4, 5. The mail was returned as undeliverable. ECF No. 7. On June 3, 2020, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation ("Report") recommending this matter be summarily dismissed with prejudice. ECF No. 8. The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious consequences if he failed to do so. Plaintiff has failed to file a response, and the time to do so has expired.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of any portion of the Report of the Magistrate Judge 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 recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The court reviews the Report only for clear error in the absence of an objection. See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (stating that "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.") (citation omitted).
After a review of the record, the applicable law, and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, the court finds no clear error and agrees with the Report's recommendation this matter should be dismissed. Plaintiff has failed to prosecute his case and has failed to establish subject matter jurisdiction in the federal court. Accordingly, the court adopts the Report by reference in this Order. This matter is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.
The Report recommends dismissal with prejudice on page 8 and without prejudice on page 4. In these circumstances, this court finds that dismissal without prejudice is appropriate. --------
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Cameron McGowan Currie
CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE
Senior United States District Judge Columbia, South Carolina
June 30, 2020