Filed: Sep. 30, 2016
Latest Update: Sep. 30, 2016
Summary: ORDER TIMOTHY M. CAIN , District Judge . Plaintiff Roger Allen Dyke, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to a magistrate judge for pretrial handling. Before the court are the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation ("First Report"), issued August 18, 2016, recommending that Plaintiff's action against Defendants Ofc. Garner, Nurse Gillhear
Summary: ORDER TIMOTHY M. CAIN , District Judge . Plaintiff Roger Allen Dyke, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to a magistrate judge for pretrial handling. Before the court are the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation ("First Report"), issued August 18, 2016, recommending that Plaintiff's action against Defendants Ofc. Garner, Nurse Gillheart..
More
ORDER
TIMOTHY M. CAIN, District Judge.
Plaintiff Roger Allen Dyke, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to a magistrate judge for pretrial handling. Before the court are the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation ("First Report"), issued August 18, 2016, recommending that Plaintiff's action against Defendants Ofc. Garner, Nurse Gillheart, J. Johnson, Cpl. King, and Ofc. Williams (collectively, the "Unserved Defendants") be dismissed for violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) (ECF No. 50)1 and the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation ("Second Report"), issued on September 6, 2016, recommending that Plaintiff's action against Bernard Mackie, Michael McCall, Larry Cartledge, C. Early, S. Duffy, Cpt. Goldden, Lt. Blackbun, Lt. McCall, F. Rice, Ofc. Collins, A. Cagle, Nurse Burgess, A. Goodwin, Director Sterlin, and Ms. Hendenberg (collectively, the "Served Defendants") be dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). (ECF No. 53).2 Plaintiff was advised of his right to file objections to the Reports. (ECF Nos. 50 at 3, and 53 at 4). However, Plaintiff has filed no objections to the Reports, and the time to do so has now run.
The Reports have no presumptive weight and the responsibility to make a final determination in this matter remains with this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). In the absence of objections, this court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the Reports. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Rather, "in 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).
After a thorough review of the entire record in this case, the court adopts the Reports (ECF Nos. 50 and 53) and incorporates them herein. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice3 against Unserved Defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) and DISMISSED with prejudice4 against Served Defendants for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and the factors outlined in Chandler Leasing Corp. v. Lopez, 669 F.2d 919, 920 (4th Cir. 1982). See Ballard v. Carlson, 882 F.2d 93 (4th Cir. 1989). Further, Defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim (ECF No. 40) is TERMINATED as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this order pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
