Burton v. Mr. Jansen, No. 9:2022cv00926 - Document 15 (D.S.C. 2022)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for 12 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 cour t finds no clear error, adopts the Report, ECF No. 12, and incorporates the Report by reference herein. As a result, this action is DISMISSED, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Signed by Honorable Sherri A Lydon on 09/23/2022. (apsn)

Download PDF
Burton v. Mr. Jansen Doc. 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA BEAUFORT DIVISION Michael Scott Burton, also known as Michael Scott Witt, C/A No. 9:22-cv-926-SAL Petitioner, v. OPINION AND ORDER Mr. Jansen, Respondent. Pro se petitioner Michael Scott Burton (“Petitioner”) filed this habeas corpus action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. This matter is before the court for review of the August 11, 2022 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Molly H. Cherry (the “Report”), ECF No. 12, recommending the court dismiss this action for lack of prosecution pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Attached to the Report is a notice advising Petitioner of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious consequences if he failed to do so. Id. at 3. Petitioner has not filed objections, and the time for doing so has expired. 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 1 Dockets.Justia.com 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). 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, ECF No. 12, and incorporates the Report by reference herein. As a result, this action is DISMISSED, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/Sherri A. Lydon Sherri A. Lydon United States District Judge September 23, 2022 Columbia, 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.