United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Orangeburg Division
matter is before the court for review of the Magistrate
Judge's Report and Recommendation (“Report”)
filed on December 17, 2018. (ECF No. 9.) The Report addresses
Petitioner Veotis Harding's (“Petitioner”)
Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus (“Petition”)
(ECF No. 1) and recommends that the court summarily dismiss
Petitioner's Petition. (ECF No. 9 at 4.) For the reasons
stated herein, the court ACCEPTS the Report
and DISMISSES Petitioner's Petition (ECF
No. 1) without prejudice.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Report sets forth the relevant facts, which this court
incorporates herein without a recitation. (Id. at
2-4.) As a brief background, Petitioner, proceeding pro
se, filed the instant Petition on December 3, 2018,
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 1 at 1.)
Petitioner initially pled guilty to all charges derived from
an indictment charging eighteen violations of 18 U.S.C.
§ 1952 and seventeen violations of 18 U.S.C. §
1956. (Id. at 3-4.) Petitioner now alleges his
conviction is illegal under United States v. Santos,
553 U.S. 507 (2008). (Id. at 7.) The Magistrate
Judge filed her Report on December 17, 2018. (ECF No. 9.) The
Report determined that the Petition is identical to the
petition in Harding v. Antonelli, No.
5:18-cv-1878-JMC-KDW. (Id. at 3.) This case is still
pending review before the court. The Report ultimately
recommends that the court summarily dismiss Petitioner's
Petition. (Id. at 4.) The parties were advised of
their right to file specific objections to the Report.
(Id. at 5.) Neither party, however, filed an
objection to the Report.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is made in
accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil
Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina. The Magistrate
Judge makes only a recommendation to this court, and the
recommendation has no presumptive weight. See Mathews v.
Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The responsibility
to make a final determination remains with this court.
Id. at 271. As such, the court is charged with
making de novo determinations of those portions of
the Report and Recommendation to which specific objections
are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3).
The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part,
the Magistrate Judge's recommendation or recommit the
matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
absence of objections to the Report, this court is not
required to provide an explanation for adopting the Report.
See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir.
1983). Rather, “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) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory
committee's note). Furthermore, failure to file specific
written objections to the Report results in a party's
waiver of the right to appeal from the judgment of the court
based upon such recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1);
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v.
Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985); United States
v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984). Since no
specific objections were filed by either party and the court
discerns no clear error, the court adopts the Report herein.
Camby, 718 F.2d at 199.
thorough review of the Report and the record in this case,
the court finds that the Report provides an accurate summary
of the facts and law and does not contain clear error.
Therefore, the court ACCEPTS the Magistrate
Judge's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 9) and
incorporates it herein. Accordingly, the court summarily
DISMISSES Petitioner's Petition for a
Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1) without prejudice.
IS SO ORDERED.
 Pursuant to the Magistrate Judge's
Report, the respondent in this case should be Bryan
Antonelli, the Warden of FCI-Williamsburg, therefore, the
court directs the Clerk of Court of the United States
District Court for the District of South Carolina to remove
the United States of America and add Bryan Antonelli, Warden