Woodruff v. Williamsburg County Detention Center ( 2023 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA Ryan Oneil Woodruff, ) Case No. 0:22-cv-1704-RMG ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER v. ) ) Williams County Detention Center ) Officer Lt. Moyd, ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 56) recommending the dismissal of this action with prejudice because of Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the court order to update any change in address. As a consequence of Plaintiff’s failure to provide his change of address, the Magistrate Judge was unable to communicate with Plaintiff, and he failed to respond to Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and the Magistrate Judge’s Roseboro order. The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility for making a final determination remains with this Court. See 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. Additionally, 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). Where the plaintiff fails to file any specific objections, “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.” See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation omitted). After reviewing the full record in this matter, the Court finds the Magistrate Judge ably addressed the issues presented and correctly concluded that the Plaintiff’s action is subject to dismissal with prejudice for failure to comply with an order of the Court. The Court adopts the R & R of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 56) as the order of the Court. This action is dismissed with prejudice. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Richard Mark Gergel United States District Judge February 22, 2023 Charleston, South Carolina