Blackwellv.Bank of America Corp.

This case is not covered by Casetext's citator
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA SPARTANBURG DIVISIONApr 12, 2012
Civil Action No.7:11-cv-02475-JMC (D.S.C. Apr. 12, 2012)

Cases citing this case

How cited

lock 6 Citing caseskeyboard_arrow_right

Civil Action No.7:11-cv-02475-JMC

04-12-2012

Harold E. Blackwell, Jr., Plaintiff, v. Bank of America Corporation, Defendant.


ORDER

This matter is before the court on the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. 60]. Plaintiff's lawsuit arises out of his termination from his employment with Defendant.

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, filed on March 22, 2012, recommends that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. 34] be granted and all pending nondispositive motions be rendered as moot. 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 herein without a recitation.

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).

No objections were filed to the Report and Recommendation. In the absence of objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, this court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Rather, "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.'" Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note). Furthermore, failure to file specific written objections to the Report and Recommendation results in a party's waiver of the right to appeal from the judgment of the District Court based upon such recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984).

After a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation and the record in this case, the court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. 60]. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [ Doc. 34] is GRANTED and all pending nondispositive motions are rendered as MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________


United States District Judge


Greenville, South Carolina


April 12, 2012



An alternative to Lexis that does not break the bank.

Casetext does more than Lexis for less than $65 per month.