From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Catoe v. York Cnty. Det. Ctr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ORANGEBURG DIVISION
Aug 19, 2013
C/A NO. 5:13-1655-CMC-KDW (D.S.C. Aug. 19, 2013)

Opinion

C/A NO. 5:13-1655-CMC-KDW

08-19-2013

Cory Seth Catoe, Plaintiff, v. York County Detention Center, Defendant.


OPINION and ORDER

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff's pro se complaint, filed in this court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 (B)(2)(e), DSC, this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Kaymani D. West for pre-trial proceedings and a Report and Recommendation ("Report"). On July 26, 2013, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious consequences if he failed to do so. Plaintiff has filed no objections and the time for doing so has expired.

The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of any portion of the Report of the Magistrate Judge to which a specific objection is made. The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The court reviews the Report only for clear error in the absence of an objection. See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (stating that "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.") (citation omitted).

After reviewing the record of this matter, the applicable law, and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, the court agrees with the conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, the court adopts and incorporates the Report and Recommendation by reference in this Order. This action is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

________

CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Columbia, South Carolina
August 19, 2013


Summaries of

Catoe v. York Cnty. Det. Ctr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ORANGEBURG DIVISION
Aug 19, 2013
C/A NO. 5:13-1655-CMC-KDW (D.S.C. Aug. 19, 2013)
Case details for

Catoe v. York Cnty. Det. Ctr.

Case Details

Full title:Cory Seth Catoe, Plaintiff, v. York County Detention Center, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ORANGEBURG DIVISION

Date published: Aug 19, 2013

Citations

C/A NO. 5:13-1655-CMC-KDW (D.S.C. Aug. 19, 2013)

Citing Cases

Martin v. Byars

Second, Martin's claims would still fail, even if they were not procedurally barred, because he does not…

Collins v. Padula

Specifically, Collins has not alleged any serious or significant emotional or physical injury that has…