From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hammett v. Sears

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Florence Division
Nov 16, 2006
Civil Action No. 4:06-2485-HFF-TER (D.S.C. Nov. 16, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 4:06-2485-HFF-TER.

November 16, 2006


ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE


The Court construes this case as a civil rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 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 the case be dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. The Magistrate Judge also recommends that this case be deemed a strike for purposes of the three strikes rule of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Report is 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 September 25, 2006. Plaintiff failed to file any objections to the Report. In the absence of objections, the Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).

After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standards set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein to the extent that it does not contradict the terms of this Order. Therefore, it is the judgment of this Court that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. The Court, however, declines to deem the dismissal a strike for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel is MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Hammett v. Sears

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Florence Division
Nov 16, 2006
Civil Action No. 4:06-2485-HFF-TER (D.S.C. Nov. 16, 2006)
Case details for

Hammett v. Sears

Case Details

Full title:ALLEN ANTHONY HAMMETT, Plaintiff, v. PHILLIP SEARS, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Florence Division

Date published: Nov 16, 2006

Citations

Civil Action No. 4:06-2485-HFF-TER (D.S.C. Nov. 16, 2006)