Reyes v. Harrell ( 2019 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE DIVISION Marvin Reyes, ) C/A No. 4:18-3376-BHH ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER vs. ) ) H. Harrell, PA; Davis, NP; Dr. Hoey; and Mr. ) Cross, Health Administrator, ) ) Defendants. ) This matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers, III, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina. On November 8, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (“Report”) that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment be granted. (ECF No. 45.) 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 this Court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270–71 (1976). The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Court may also receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. Id. The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report to which specific objections are made. Plaintiff filed no objections and the time for doing so expired on November 25, 2019. In the absence of objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report, this Court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Moreover, “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 and advisory committee’s note). Here, because no objections have been filed, the Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations for clear error. Finding none, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s analysis and conclusions. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 45) is ADOPTED and incorporated herein by reference and Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 24) is GRANTED. Judgment shall enter in favor of Defendants. IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/Bruce Howe Hendricks Bruce Howe Hendricks United States District Judge December 30, 2019 Charleston, South Carolina ***** NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL The parties are hereby notified that any right to appeal this Order is governed by Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.