Sharp v. Dolan

Filing 10

OPINION AND ORDER adopting 6 Report and Recommendations; denying 2 Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis/affidavit of indigency. The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing case with prejudice, terminate all pending deadlines and motions, and close the file. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 7/19/2017. (RKR)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
DARYL SHARP, Ambassador and
representative of the Living
God Jehovah,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No:

2:17-cv-341-FtM-99MRM

TIMOTHY DOLAN, Archbishop
and the leaders of the U.S.
Conference
of
Catholic
Bishops,
Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on consideration of the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. #6), filed June
27, 2017, recommending that that the motion to proceed in forma
pauperis be denied and the case dismissed.

No valid objections

have been filed and the time to file objections has expired.
The Court notes that plaintiff filed various documents after
the issuance of the Report and Recommendation, however none of the
documents are responsive or could be construed as an objection.
One includes 56 pages as follows: a docket sheet from a District
of Columbia case filed by plaintiff against Timothy Dolan and the
Leaders of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops; a letter by
plaintiff to an unknown person or entity; a filing made with the
Clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States; various statements

by plaintiff on congressional letterhead of Congressman Tom Price;
directives for briefing from the District of Columbia Circuit
Court;

plaintiff’s

motion

for

summary

judgment

and

exhibits

presented to the appellate court; and the Memorandum Opinion by a
District Judge in the District of Columbia, dated January 3, 2017,
dismissing plaintiff’s case with prejudice.

(Doc. #7.)

The

second set of documents, consisting of 51 pages, includes many of
the same filings as the first set, as well as plaintiff’s library
card for the Library of Congress; the cover of a Guide published
by Homeland Security, and plaintiff’s confirmed registration for
a summit by email; a criminal Information charging plaintiff with
assaulting and threatening Goodwin Osedel in a menacing manner
with hand-written notations on it; a criminal Information charging
plaintiff with unlawfully entering or attempting to enter the
Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception with
hand-written notes on it; a Prince George County (District Court
of Maryland) Trial Summary where charges were nolle prosed; and a
City

of

Alexandria,

Virginia

Not

Trespassing/Barment

barring entry by plaintiff to Kingdom Hall.

(Doc. #8.)

Notice
A third

set of 56 pages, filed on July 17, 2017, consists of copies of the
same docket sheet from the District of Columbia and previously
filed documents.

(Doc. #9.)

After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings
and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify

- 2 -

the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.
636(b)(1);

28 U.S.C. §

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.
636(b)(1).

28 U.S.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).
The Complaint bears “in the Supreme Court of the United
States”, but was filed in the Middle District of Florida Fort Myers
Division.

Plaintiff is not a resident of Florida, and neither are

the identified defendants.

There is no basis for jurisdiction or

venue articulated in the Complaint (Doc. #1), which seeks the
imposition

of

criminal

charges

against

defendants.

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.

As the

Complaint in this case is a duplicate of the Complaint filed in
the District of Columbia, which was dismissed with prejudice as

- 3 -

frivolous, the Court will also dismiss this case with prejudice.
See Sharp v. Dolan, 1:17-cv-15-UA, Doc. #1 (D.D.C. Jan. 4, 2017).
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1.

The

Report

and

Recommendation

(Doc.

#6)

is

hereby

adopted and the findings incorporated herein.
2.

Plaintiff's nonnotarized Affidavit of Indigency (Doc.

#2), construed as a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, is DENIED.
3.

The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing the case with

prejudice, terminate all pending motions and deadlines, and close
the file.
DONE and ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this
of July, 2017.

Copies:
Hon. Mac R. McCoy
United States Magistrate Judge
Counsel of Record
Unrepresented parties

- 4 -

19th

day