Kimberly Taylor (Turner) v. Dillard's Inc

• Court: District Court, D. South Carolina
• Decided: August 29, 2024
• Docket: 3:24-cv-03005
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION

Kimberly Taylor (Turner), C/A No. 3:24-cv-3005-SAL-PJG

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER Dillard’s, Inc.; Heather H. Lagasse; Raymond Stockley; Angela Bower,

Defendants.

Plaintiff Kimberly Taylor, a pro se litigant, filed this action asserting claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). This matter is before the court on the Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) issued by United States Magistrate Judge Paige J. Gossett, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.), recommending Defendants Heather H. Lagasse, Raymond Stockley, and Angela Bower be summarily dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. [ECF No. 22.] Attached to the Report was a notice advising Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious consequences if she failed to do so. Id. at 4. Plaintiff 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 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 reviewing 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. 22, and incorporates it by reference herein. As a result of the claims based on Title VII, the ADA, and the ADEA, Defendants Heather H. Lagasse, Raymond Stockley, and Angela Bower are DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sherr tk. August 29, 2024 Sherr A. ee Columbia, South Carolina United States District Judge