From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tate v. Swanson Services Corporation

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
Jun 9, 2009
C.A. #2:08-3148-PMD (D.S.C. Jun. 9, 2009)

Opinion

C.A. #2:08-3148-PMD.

June 9, 2009


ORDER


This matter is before the court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that the within action be dismissed. Because plaintiff is pro se, this matter was referred to the magistrate judge.

Pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 United States Code, § 636(b)(1), and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d), D.S.C., the magistrate judge is authorized to review all pretrial matters, and submit findings and recommendations to this Court.

This court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate judge's report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, absent timely objections by a dissatisfied party within ten (10) days of the filing of the report, the district court is not required to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge's report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984). No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge's report.

In Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985), the court held "that a pro se litigant must receive fair notification of the consequences of failure to object to a magistrate judge's report before such a procedural default will result in waiver of the right to appeal. The notice must be `sufficiently understandable to one in appellant's circumstances fairly to appraise him of what is required.'" Id. at 846. Plaintiff was advised in a clear manner that his objections had to be filed within ten (10) days, and he received notice of the consequences at the appellate level of his failure to object to the magistrate judge's report.

A review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Finding no error in the report, this court adopts the report and recommendation and incorporates it into this order.

For the reasons articulated by the magistrate judge it is hereby ordered that the within action be dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

Plaintiff is hereby notified that he has the right to appeal this Order within thirty (30) days from the date hereof pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

Tate v. Swanson Services Corporation

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
Jun 9, 2009
C.A. #2:08-3148-PMD (D.S.C. Jun. 9, 2009)
Case details for

Tate v. Swanson Services Corporation

Case Details

Full title:Randy Tate, Plaintiff, v. Swanson Services Corporation, Sheriff Bryant and…

Court:United States District Court, D. South Carolina

Date published: Jun 9, 2009

Citations

C.A. #2:08-3148-PMD (D.S.C. Jun. 9, 2009)

Citing Cases

Carmichael v. Ozmint

However, because exhaustion is a prerequisite to suit, all available remedies must be exhausted prior to…