Opinion
C.A. No.: 6:10-cv-02341-JMC.
January 6, 2011
ORDER AND OPINION
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff Damion Ligon's suit filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Greenwood County Detention Center (GCDC). The Magistrate Judge filed his Report and Recommendation [Doc. # 18] on November 18, 2010, and recommended that Plaintiff's Complaint [Doc. # 1] be dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. The Report and Recommendation sets forth in detail the relevant facts and legal standards on this matter, and the court incorporates the Magistrate Judge's recommendation without a recitation.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The 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. The recommendation has no presumptive weight. The responsibility to make a final determination remains with this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objections are made, and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the Magistrate Judge's recommendation or recommit the matter with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
DISCUSSION
Plaintiff alleges he was incarcerated for nine (9) months at the GCDC for first degree burglary and grand larceny charges before the charges were dismissed. Plaintiff, who alleges he is a single parent, states he lost his house and nine (9) months of wages while incarcerated. Plaintiff seeks damages for false arrest.
Plaintiff timely filed objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. [Doc. # 21]. Objections to the Report and Recommendation must be specific. Failure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of a party's right to further judicial review, including appellate review, if the recommendation is accepted by the district judge. See United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 94 n. 4 (4th Cir. 1984). In the absence of specific objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, 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). Upon review, the court finds that the majority of Plaintiff's objections are non-specific, unrelated to the dispositive portions of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, or merely restate Plaintiff's claims.
For the foregoing reasons, the court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. # 18] and DISMISSES the Complaint without prejudice and without issuance of service of process.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
January 6, 2011
Greenville, South Carolina