Opinion
C.A. No. 6:06-2423-HMH-WMC.
November 1, 2006
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge William M. Catoe, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommenda-tion has no presumptive weight. 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 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) (West Supp. 2006).
The Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report and Recommendation. 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 adopts Magistrate Judge Catoe's Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein. It is therefore
ORDERED that the complaint in the above-captioned case is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. It is further
ORDERED that this case is deemed a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and (g). It is further
ORDERED that the Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, document number 2, motion for change of venue, document number 10, and motion for discovery, document number 11, are denied as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.