Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Verderosa v. Vandermosen

United States District Court, District of South Carolina

May 12, 2015

Marc Kendell Verderosa, Plaintiff,
v.
John Vandermosen, Paul B. Wickensimer, Defendants.

ORDER

Mary G. Lewis United States District Judge

On October 6, 2014, the Plaintiff, Marc Kendell Verderosa, (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, brought this civil action seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1). The matter now comes before this Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (“the Report”) filed by Magistrate Judge Jacquelyn D. Austin, to whom this case had previously been assigned. In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends that Plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and other cited authorities. (ECF No. 35). Objections to the Report were due by May 8, 2015. Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report.

This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that Report. 28 U.S.C. § 636. In the absence of 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).

The Court has carefully reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and finds no error in the Report. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED, (ECF No. 35), and Plaintiff’s complaint is thereby DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Rule 41(b). Additionally, in light of the foregoing, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, (ECF No. 29), is properly terminated as MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.