United States District Court, D. South Carolina
Morris Stewart, also known as Morris Fitzgerald Stewart, Jr., #343460, Petitioner,
John Pate, Warden, Respondent.
DAVID C. NORTON, District Judge.
The above referenced case is before this court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that this action be dismissed with prejudice for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court's orders, pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
This court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate judge's report 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(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge's report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1208 (1984). No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation.
A de novo review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the magistrate judge's report and recommendation is AFFIRMED, and this action is DISMISSED with prejudice for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with this court's orders, pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is denied because petitioner has failed to make "a substantial showing of the denial of a ...