Opinion
C/A NO. 9:12-3415-CMC-BM
02-06-2013
Edward Walter Broadnax, III, #329602, Plaintiff, v. Director Myers; Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center, Defendants.
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 Bristow Marchant for pre-trial proceedings and a Report and Recommendation ("Report"). On January 2, 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 filed objections to the Report on January 17, 2013.
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).
After conducting a de novo review as to objections made, and considering the record, the applicable law, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and Plaintiff's objections, 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.
Plaintiff contends that the case should continue as to Defendant Myers because Myers is "responsible for the well doing of all inmates . . . ." Obj. at 1. Additionally, Plaintiff maintains that the complaint indicates that his tooth was knocked out as a result of the incident, and that he seeks payment for reconstructive dental work and "$100,000 dollars for relief." Id. Plaintiff's objections fail to overcome the infirmity of his complaint; namely, that he cannot establish a cause of action under § 1983 for supervisory liability based upon the facts alleged.
This matter 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
February 6, 2013