Opinion
Civil Action No. 4:13-0185-SB
11-20-2012
Dustin Gaines, #316068, Plaintiff, v. Sgt. H. Sims, Defendant.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon the Plaintiff's pro se complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, By focal rule, this matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge for preliminary determinations.
On September 26, 2013, Defendant Sims filed a motion for summary judgment. Thereafter, the Magistrate Judge issued a Roseboro order, advising the Plaintiff of the summary judgment procedures and of the possible consequences if he failed to respond adequately to the motion. Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir. 1975). Based on the Plaintiff's failure to respond, the Magistrate Judge issued a report a nd recommendation ("R&R") on October 31, 2013, recommending that the Court dismiss this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Attached to the R&R was a notice advising the Plaintiff of the right to file specific, written objections to the R&R within fourteen days of the date of service of the R&R. To date, no objections have been fifed.
Absent timely objection from a dissatisfied party, a district court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, a Magistrate Judge's factual or legal conclusions. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985); Wells v. Shriner's Hosp ., 109 F.3d 198, 201 (4th Cir. 1997). Here, because the Plaintiff did not file any specific, written objections, there are no portions of the R&R to which the Court must conduct a de novo review. Accordingly, after consideration of this matter, the Court hereby adopts the Magistrate Judge's R&R (Entry 37), and it is
ORDERED that this action is dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
________________________
Sol Blatt, Jr.
Senior United States District Judge
November 20, 2012
Charleston, South Carolina