Filed: Feb. 12, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 12, 2018
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION MADELINE HUGHES HAIKALA , District Judge . On January 22, 2018, the magistrate judge filed a report in which he recommended that the Court deny plaintiff Gary Lynn Weeks's motion for summary judgment and grant the defendants' motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 45). The magistrate judge advised the parties of their right to object within 14 days. (Doc. 45, pp. 13-14). To date, no party has filed objections to the report and recommendation. A district court "may accept, re
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION MADELINE HUGHES HAIKALA , District Judge . On January 22, 2018, the magistrate judge filed a report in which he recommended that the Court deny plaintiff Gary Lynn Weeks's motion for summary judgment and grant the defendants' motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 45). The magistrate judge advised the parties of their right to object within 14 days. (Doc. 45, pp. 13-14). To date, no party has filed objections to the report and recommendation. A district court "may accept, rej..
More
MEMORANDUM OPINION
MADELINE HUGHES HAIKALA, District Judge.
On January 22, 2018, the magistrate judge filed a report in which he recommended that the Court deny plaintiff Gary Lynn Weeks's motion for summary judgment and grant the defendants' motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 45). The magistrate judge advised the parties of their right to object within 14 days. (Doc. 45, pp. 13-14). To date, no party has filed objections to the report and recommendation.
A district court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). A district court reviews legal conclusions in a report de novo and reviews for plain error factual findings to which no objection is made. Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 745, 749 (11th Cir. 1988); Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 Fed. Appx. 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006).1
Based on its review of the record in this case, the Court finds no misstatements of law in the report and no plain error in the magistrate judge's description of the relevant facts. Therefore, the Court adopts the magistrate judge's report and accepts his recommendation.
The Court will issue a separate final judgment consistent with this memorandum opinion.
DONE and ORDERED.
