Jones v. Cayce Public Safety et al, No. 3:2010cv02824 - Document 114 (D.S.C. 2012)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS adopting 106 Report and Recommendations, granting 74 Motion for Summary Judgment, filed by J Merrill, Jeff Simmons and declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state law claims. Signed by Honorable Henry M Herlong, Jr on 1/11/2012. (jpet, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION Dwight Xavier Jones, Plaintiff, vs. J. Merrill; LT Jeff Simmons, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) C.A. No. 3:10-2824-HMH-PJG OPINION & ORDER This matter is before the court with the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Paige J. Gossett, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02 of the District of South Carolina.1 Dwight Xavier Jones ( Jones ), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In her Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Gossett recommends granting the Defendants motion for summary judgment and declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state law claims. Subsequent to the issuance of the Report and Recommendation, Jones filed three letters, which the court construes as objections to the Report and Recommendation. 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 Report and 1 The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility for making a final determination remains with the United States District 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 objection is made. The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the magistrate judge or recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Recommendation of the magistrate judge, 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 Jones objections are non-specific, unrelated to the dispositive portions of the magistrate judge s Report and Recommendation, or merely restate his claims. Accordingly, the court finds that Jones objections are without merit. Therefore, after a thorough review of the magistrate judge s Report and the record in this case, the court adopts Magistrate Judge Gossett s Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein by reference. It is therefore ORDERED that the Defendants motion for summary judgment, docket number 74, is granted and the court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any state law claims. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Henry M. Herlong, Jr. Senior United States District Judge Greenville, South Carolina January 11, 2012 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. 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.