Opinion
Case No. 8:13-cv-02217-T-27EAJ
2013-09-23
EARL CONEY, JR., Plaintiff, v. CITY OF TAMPA, Defendant.
ORDER
BEFORE THE COURT is the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 4) from the Magistrate Judge recommending that Plaintiff's construed motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 2) be denied without prejudice and Plaintiff be given an opportunity to file an amended complaint and a new motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff has not filed objections to the Report and Recommendation, and the time for filing such objections has now elapsed.
A district court may accept, reject or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that factual findings be reviewed de novo, and the court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations. § 636(b)(1)(C); Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993). Legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See LeCroy v. McNeil, 397 Fed. Appx. 554, 556 (11th Cir. 2010) (citing United States v. Warren, 687 F.2d 347, 348 (11th Cir. 1982)); Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).
After conducting a careful and complete review, the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 4) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in full, to be made a part of this Order for all purposes, including for appellate review.
Accordingly,
1) The construed motion to leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 2) is DENIED without prejudice.
2) The Complaint (Dkt. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice.
3) Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to file an amended complaint and revised motion to proceed in forma pauperis on or before October 21, 2013. Failure to timely file an amended complaint may result in dismissal without further notice.
_______________
JAMES D. WHITTEMORE
United States District Judge
Copies to: Plaintiff