United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Greenville Division
OPINION & ORDER
HENRY M. HERLONG, Jr., Senior District Judge.
This matter is before the court with the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kevin F. McDonald, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 of the District of South Carolina. Constance Hauck Adamson ("Adamson"), proceeding pro se, alleges several constitutional violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In his Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge McDonald recommends summarily dismissing the above-captioned case without prejudice and without service of process.
Adamson filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. Objections to the Report and Recommendation must be specific. Failure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of a party's right to further judicial review, including appellate review, if the recommendation is accepted by the district judge. See United States v. Schronce , 727 F.2d 91, 94 & n.4 (4th Cir. 1984). In the absence of specific objections to the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge, this court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis , 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983).
Upon review, the court finds that Adamson's objections are non-specific, unrelated to the dispositive portions of the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation, or merely restate her claims. Therefore, after a thorough review of the magistrate judge's Report and the record in this case, the court adopts Magistrate Judge McDonald's Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein by reference.
It is therefore
ORDERED that the Plaintiff's complaint, docket number 1, is summarily dismissed without prejudice ...