From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McClellan v. Duffy

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA BEAUFORT DIVISION
Nov 16, 2020
Case No. 9:19-cv-1864-SAL (D.S.C. Nov. 16, 2020)

Opinion

Case No. 9:19-cv-1864-SAL

11-16-2020

James Anderson McClellan, #164831 Plaintiff, v. Associate Warden Susan Duffy, Defendant.


ORDER

This matter is before the Court for review of the May 12, 2020 Report and Recommendation ("Report") of United States Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.). See ECF No. 54. In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends the case be dismissed for lack of prosecution or, alternatively, due to Plaintiff's failure to exhaust his administrative remedies.

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 this Court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of only those portions of the Report that have been specifically objected to, and the Court may accept, reject, or modify the Report, in whole or in part. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In the absence of objections, the Court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the Report and 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 & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note). After a thorough review of the Report, the applicable law, and the record of this case in accordance with the above standard, the Court finds no clear error, adopts the Report, and incorporates the Report by reference herein. Accordingly, this Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice for lack of prosecution pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/Sherri A. Lydon

Sherri A. Lydon

United States District Judge

November 16, 2020

Florence, South Carolina


Summaries of

McClellan v. Duffy

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA BEAUFORT DIVISION
Nov 16, 2020
Case No. 9:19-cv-1864-SAL (D.S.C. Nov. 16, 2020)
Case details for

McClellan v. Duffy

Case Details

Full title:James Anderson McClellan, #164831 Plaintiff, v. Associate Warden Susan…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA BEAUFORT DIVISION

Date published: Nov 16, 2020

Citations

Case No. 9:19-cv-1864-SAL (D.S.C. Nov. 16, 2020)