From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ross v. Goldsmith

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Greenville Division
Feb 6, 2006
C/A No. 6:05-3482-GRA-WMC (D.S.C. Feb. 6, 2006)

Opinion

C/A No. 6:05-3482-GRA-WMC.

February 6, 2006


ORDER (Written Opinion)


This matter is before the Court for a review of the magistrate's Report and Recommendation made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d), D.S.C., and filed January 11, 2006. Plaintiff brought this suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The magistrate recommends dismissing Plaintiff's complaint without prejudice and without issuance of service of process.

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. This Court is required to construe pro se pleadings liberally. Such pleadings are held to a less stringent standard than those drafted by attorneys. Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978). This Court is charged with liberally construing a pleading filed by a pro se litigant to allow for the development of a potentially meritorious claim. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972).

The magistrate makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and responsibility for making a final determination remains with this Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). This Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objection is made, and this Court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). This Court may also "receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate with instructions." Id. In the absence of specific objections to the Report and Recommendation, this Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198 (4th. Cir. 1983). Plaintiff has not objected to the Report and Recommendation.

After a review of the magistrate's Report and Recommendation, this Court finds that the report is based upon the proper law. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted in its entirety.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint be DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance of service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Ross v. Goldsmith

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Greenville Division
Feb 6, 2006
C/A No. 6:05-3482-GRA-WMC (D.S.C. Feb. 6, 2006)
Case details for

Ross v. Goldsmith

Case Details

Full title:Robert David Ross, Plaintiff, v. James R. Goldsmith, Jr., Defendants

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

Date published: Feb 6, 2006

Citations

C/A No. 6:05-3482-GRA-WMC (D.S.C. Feb. 6, 2006)