Filed: May 06, 2019
Latest Update: May 06, 2019
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS MARY G. LEWIS , District Judge . Plaintiff Cynthia B. Woods (Woods) filed this employment action against her former employer, Defendant South Carolina Department of Health & Human Services (SCDHHS), as well as SCDHHS employees Defendants Mona Sechrest, Marsha Brown, Kim Backman, and Dr. Pete Liggett. She is proceeding pro se. The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (R
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS MARY G. LEWIS , District Judge . Plaintiff Cynthia B. Woods (Woods) filed this employment action against her former employer, Defendant South Carolina Department of Health & Human Services (SCDHHS), as well as SCDHHS employees Defendants Mona Sechrest, Marsha Brown, Kim Backman, and Dr. Pete Liggett. She is proceeding pro se. The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Re..
More
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS
MARY G. LEWIS, District Judge.
Plaintiff Cynthia B. Woods (Woods) filed this employment action against her former employer, Defendant South Carolina Department of Health & Human Services (SCDHHS), as well as SCDHHS employees Defendants Mona Sechrest, Marsha Brown, Kim Backman, and Dr. Pete Liggett. She 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 Defendants' motion to dismiss be granted. The Report was 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 April 18, 2019, but Woods failed to file any objections. "[I]n 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.'" Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note). 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. Therefore, it is the judgment of this Court Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
*****
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
Griffin is hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from the date hereof, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
