ORDER

MONTE C. RICHARDSON, Magistrate Judge.

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 21; Report), entered by the Honorable Monte C. Richardson, United States Magistrate Judge, on January 23, 2012. In the Report, Magistrate Judge Richardson recommends that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 17) be granted and that this action be dismissed with prejudice for failure to comply with Court orders and to prosecute the case. See Report at 6. Plaintiff has failed to file objections to the Report, and the time for doing so has now passed.

The Court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). If no specific objections to findings of fact are filed, the district court is not required to conduct a de novo review of those findings. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, the district court must review legal conclusions de novo. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); United States v. Rice, No. 2:07-mc-8-FtM-29SPC, 2007 WL 1428615 at *1 (M.D. Fla. May 14, 2007).

Upon independent review of the file and for the reasons stated in the Magistrate Judge's Report, the Court will accept and adopt the legal and factual conclusions recommended by the Magistrate Judge with one modification.1 Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED:

1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 21), as modified, is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.

2. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 17) is GRANTED.

3. This case is DISMISSED.

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate all pending motions and deadlines as moot and close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED.