Gibson v. Jacobs et al, No. 0:2016cv02296 - Document 43 (D.S.C. 2017)

Court Description: ORDER AND OPINION adopting the 39 Report and Recommendation, dismissing the action with prejudice for lack of prosecution, and terminating the 31 motion for summary judgment. Signed by Honorable Richard M. Gergel on 4/24/2017. (bgoo)

Download PDF
Gibson v. Jacobs et al Doc. 43 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ROCK HILL DIVISION Nathaniel Gibson, Plaintiff, v. Doctor Theodolph Jacobs; Licensed Practical Nurse Travato, Defendants. Case No 0: 16-cv-2296-RMG ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER AND OPINION Nathaniel Gibson ("Plaintiff'), proceeding pro se, brought this action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 3, 2017, the Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. (Dkt. No. 31.) Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the Magistrate's Roseboro order (Dkt. No. 33), Plaintiff failed to respond to the motion for summary judgment. This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("R. & R.") of the Magistrate Judge to dismiss this action with prejudice for lack of prosecution. (Dkt. No. 39.) The Magistrate mailed the R. & R. to Plaintiff on April 4, 2017, indicating that Plaintiffs objections were due by April 18, 2017. (Dkt. No. 40.) Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6, Plaintiff had an additional three days (until April 21, 2017) to file his objections to the R. & R because it was served by mail. As of April 21, 2017, no objections to the R. & R. were filed. While this Court will conduct a de novo review of any portion of the R. & R. to which a specific objection is made, it appears Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the Magistrate absent objection by any party. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). This Court's review of the record indicates that the R. & R. accurately analyzes the facts of this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, this Court adopts the Magistrate's R. & R. as the Order of this Court. This action is dismissed with prejudice for lack of prosecution. Accordingly, defendants' pending motion for summary judgment is terminated. (Dkt. No. 31.) AND IT IS SO ORDERED. United States District Court Judge J /, April J.. 2017 Charleston, South Carolina -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.