Crocker v. Tucker, No. 4:2020cv03089 - Document 17 (D.S.C. 2021)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: After a thorough review of the Report, the applicable law, and the record of this case in accordance with the above standard, the court finds no clear error, adopts the 10 Report, and incorporates the Report by reference herein. Accordingly, the above-captioned action is DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance of service of process. Signed by Honorable Sherri A Lydon on 1/28/2021. (prou, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Crocker v. Tucker 4:20-cv-03089-SAL Date Filed 01/28/21 Entry Number 17 Page 1 of 2 Doc. 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA Braeden Crocker, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Todd Tucker, ) ) Defendant. ) ___________________________________ ) C/A No. 4:20-cv-03089-SAL OPINION & ORDER This matter is before the Court for review of the September 9, 2020 Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Kaymani D. West (the “Report”), made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d) (D.S.C.). In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the court dismiss the case without prejudice and without issuance of service of process. [ECF No. 10.] Attached to the Report was a Notice of Right to File Objections. Id. No party filed objections to the Report, and the time for response has lapsed. The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and 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 only those portions of the Report that have been specifically objected to, and the court may accept, reject, or modify the Report, in whole or in part. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In the absence of objections, the court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the Report and 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) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note). 1 Dockets.Justia.com 4:20-cv-03089-SAL Date Filed 01/28/21 Entry Number 17 Page 2 of 2 After a thorough review of the Report, the applicable law, and the record of this case in accordance with the above standard, the court finds no clear error, adopts the Report, and incorporates the Report by reference herein. Accordingly, the above-captioned action is DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance of service of process. IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Sherri A. Lydon United States District Judge January 28, 2021 Florence, 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.
