Filed: Jun. 16, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 16, 2015
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER JOHN E. STEELE , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #48), filed January 7, 2015, recommending that the case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Initially, plaintiff appeared and sought additional time to obtain counsel. (Doc. #49.) The Court granted an extension of time for plaintiff to either have new counsel appear on his behalf, or to proceed unrepresented by s
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER JOHN E. STEELE , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #48), filed January 7, 2015, recommending that the case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Initially, plaintiff appeared and sought additional time to obtain counsel. (Doc. #49.) The Court granted an extension of time for plaintiff to either have new counsel appear on his behalf, or to proceed unrepresented by su..
More
OPINION AND ORDER
JOHN E. STEELE, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #48), filed January 7, 2015, recommending that the case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Initially, plaintiff appeared and sought additional time to obtain counsel. (Doc. #49.) The Court granted an extension of time for plaintiff to either have new counsel appear on his behalf, or to proceed unrepresented by submitting a Case Management Repot. Plaintiff was on notice that the failure to proceed with one of these options would result in the adoption of the Report and Recommendation and the dismissal of the case. (Doc. #50.) Plaintiff failed to exercise one of the two options, and further failed to file any objections to the Report and Recommendation and the deadlines to do so have expired.
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F.Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff'd, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994) (Table).
After conducting an independent examination of the file and upon due consideration of the Report and Recommendation, the Court accepts the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. #48) is hereby adopted and the findings incorporated herein.
2. The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing the case without prejudice for failure to prosecute, terminate all pending motions and deadlines, and close the file.
DONE and ORDERED.
