United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Florence Division
OPINION AND ORDER
MARY G. LEWIS, District Judge.
This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kaymani D. West, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina. (ECF No. 184.)
Plaintiff Charles McNeil ("Plaintiff") proceeding pro se filed this action alleging violations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) The Magistrate Judge recommends that the case against Defendants Greene, Wick, and Cullough be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight. The responsibility for making a final determination remains with this Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the Report and Recommendation or may recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objections are made. Plaintiff was advised of her right to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. (ECF No. 178-1.) However, he has not done so and objections were due on May 14, 2014. 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).
Having reviewed the record in this case, the applicable law, and the Report and Recommendation for clear error, and finding none, the court adopts and incorporates the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 184) by reference. As such, this action is DISMISSED without ...