Majid V Nurse Practioner Everln May

Court Listener

Automated Summary

Key Facts

Plaintiff Shahid Majid filed a lawsuit against Nurse Practitioners Everln May and Lilian Emetu, Medical Director Wanda Sermons, RN Tracey Massey, and SCDC. A United States Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation on July 18, 2025, suggesting Majid's motions for a preliminary injunction be denied. Majid failed to file any objections to the Report. On August 5, 2025, the District Court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation and denied Majid's motions for a preliminary injunction.

Issues

The Court reviews a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation regarding Plaintiff Shahid Majid's motions for a preliminary injunction. After finding no clear error in the record and noting the Plaintiff failed to file objections, the Court adopts the Report and denies the motions.

Holdings

The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina Rock Hill Division adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and denied Plaintiff Shahid Majid's motions for a preliminary injunction. The Court determined that since Majid failed to file timely objections to the Report filed on July 18, 2025, the Court was not required to conduct a de novo review. Instead, the Court satisfied itself that there was no clear error on the face of the record and incorporated the Magistrate Judge's recommendation into the final order.

Remedies

The Court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and denied Plaintiff Shahid Majid's motions for a preliminary injunction

Legal Principles

When a party fails to file timely objections to a United States Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation. Failure to object waives appellate review. The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to the Court, and the recommendation has no presumptive weight. The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report to which specific objection is made.

Precedent Name

  • Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co.
  • Mathews v. Weber
  • Wright v. Collins

Cited Statute

  • Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
  • United States Code
  • Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure

Judge Name

Judge Mary Geiger Lewis

Passage Text

  • After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. It is therefore the judgment of the Court Majid's motions for a preliminary injunction are DENIED.
  • In the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must 'only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.'