Washington v. Few ( 2023 )

= 3 Be IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA BEAUFORT DIVISION WILLIAM WASHINGTON, § Plaintiff, § VS. § CIVIL ACTION 9:22-02486-MGL-MHC § § JOHN CANNON FEW and V. CLAIRE § ALLEN, § Defendants. § ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING THIS ACTION WITHOUT ISSUANCE AND SERVICE OF PROCESS, Plaintiff William Washington (Washington) filed this 42 U.S.C. 1983 lawsuit against Defendants John Cannon Few and V. Claire Allen. Washington is self represented. The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting this action be dismissed without issuance and service of process. 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 December 6, 2022, and the Clerk entered Washington’s untimely objections to the Report on January 23, 2023. The Court has reviewed the objections, but holds them to be without merit. It will therefore enter judgment accordingly. Washington’s two-page submission of objections is mostly a mish-mash of statements, to which the Court need not address. Suffice it to say this case easily warrants dismissal. Inasmuch as the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s comprehensive and well-reasoned Report as to why this case should be dismissed, it need not repeat here what she wrote there. Hence, the Court will overrule these objections. Concerning Washington’s objection that he failed to receive the necessary forms to bring his case into proper form: because this action is subject to dismissal on the merits, this claim is of no moment. Thus, the Court will overrule this objection, too. After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard set forth above, the Court overrules Washington’s objections, adopts the Report, and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of the Court that this action is DISMISSED without issuance and service of process. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed this 20th day of April, 2023, in Columbia, South Carolina. s/ Mary Geiger Lewis MARY GEIGER LEWIS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ***** NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.