Bilal A. Al-Haqq v. Ms. Lucas, Ms. Pugh, Ms. Bostic, Mr. Thomas, Lt. Fleming

Al-Haqq · United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, Charleston Division · March 13, 2026 · No. 2:24-cv-03960-DCC

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina adopts the magistrate judge’s recommendation in a civil-rights action brought by Bilal A. Al-Haqq. The court grants defendants’ motion for summary judgment and denies the plaintiff’s motions for a preliminary injunction and summary judgment after finding no clear error in the unobjected-to Report and Recommendation.

Court
United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, Charleston Division
Writing for the Court
Donald C. Coggins, Jr.
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, Charleston Division
Decision date
March 13, 2026
Docket number
2:24-cv-03960-DCC
Procedural posture
The district court reviewed a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation addressing the defendants' motion for summary judgment and the plaintiff's motions for summary judgment and a preliminary injunction. No party filed objections.
Standard of review
In the absence of specific objections to a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation, the district court reviews the Report for clear error on the face of the record rather than conducting de novo review.
Precedential value
Unknown; district court order designated per curiam, with no published reporter citation appearing in the source.
Parties
Bilal A. Al-Haqq v. Ms. Lucas, Ms. Pugh, Ms. Bostic, Mr. Thomas, Lt. Fleming
Disposition
other

Topics

summary judgmentinjunctionscivil rightscivil procedure

Practice areas

civil rightscivil procedurefederal courts

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court should review the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation for clear error when no party filed objections.
  2. Whether to grant Defendants' motion for summary judgment.
  3. Whether to grant Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction.
  4. Whether to grant Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.

Holdings

  1. When no timely objection is filed, the district court need not conduct de novo review and may review the Report and Recommendation for clear error on the face of the record.
  2. Defendants' motion for summary judgment was granted.
  3. Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction was denied.
  4. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was denied.

Key quotations

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.

Factual background

Plaintiff filed a verified complaint alleging violations of his civil rights. The record before the court included cross-motions for summary judgment and Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. The district court did not describe the underlying civil-rights allegations in detail in this order.

Procedural history

Plaintiff filed a verified complaint alleging civil-rights violations. Defendants moved for summary judgment, and Plaintiff moved for a preliminary injunction and separately for summary judgment. The magistrate judge recommended granting Defendants' motion and denying Plaintiff's motions. With no objections filed, the district court reviewed the Report for clear error, found none, and adopted its recommendation.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…