United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Charleston Division
RICHARD MARK GERGEL, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("R & R") of the Magistrate Judge recommending that Defendant Kevin Paige's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings be granted and to the extent that Plaintiff has asserted a state law tort claim against Paige in his individual capacity, such a claim be dismissed. (Dkt. No. 59). No objections have been filed. For the reasons set forth below, the Court agrees and ADOPTS the R & R as the order of the Court.
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. Matthews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). This Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the R & R to which specific objection is made. Here, however, because no objection has been made, this Court "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 & Ace. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P 72 advisory committee note). Moreover, in the absence of specific objections to the R & R, the Court need not give any explanation for adopting the Magistrate Judge's analysis and recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 200 (4th Cir. 1983).
Under the South Carolina Tort Claims Act, Defendant Paige is not subject to suit in his individual capacity for a state law tort. Therefore, the District Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's R & R, (Dkt. No. 59), as the order of the Court. Accordingly, the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Dkt. No. 47) is GRANTED and the ...