Watson v. Capital One Services, LLC et al

Filing 61

ORDER adopting 59 Report and Recommendations; granting Defendant Rubin and Debski's 21 Motion to dismiss; and denying Defendant Rubin and Debski's 24 Motion for sanctions. Signed by Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr. on 6/28/2011. (RMN)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

OPAL WATSON,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No. 3:10-cv-358-J-37JRK

CAPITAL ONE SERVICES, LLC, etc., and
RUBIN & DEBSKI, P.A.,
Defendants.

ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the following:
1.

Defendant Rubin & Debski’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint
(Doc. No. 21), filed October 11, 2010;

2.

Defendant, Rubin & Debski, P.A., Motion for Sanctions Against Plaintiff (Doc. No.
24), filed November 30, 2010;

3.

Plaintiff’s Response to Rubin & Debski, P.A.’s Motion to Dismiss Amended
Complaint (Doc. No. 36), filed January 10, 2011;

4.

Plaintiff’s Response to Rubin & Debski, P.A.’s Motion for Sanctions (Doc. No. 37),
filed January 10, 2011; and

5.

Reply of Defendant Rubin & Debski, P.A. to Plaintiff’s Response to Rubin & Debski’s
Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 38), filed January 13, 2011.

United States Magistrate Judge James R. Klindt submitted a report (Doc. No. 59), filed June
7, 2011, recommending Defendant Rubin & Debski’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended

Complaint (Doc. No. 21) be granted and Defendant, Rubin & Debski, P.A., Motion for Sanctions
Against Plaintiff (Doc. No. 24) be denied.
After an independent de novo review of the record in this matter, and noting that no objections
were timely filed, the Court agrees with the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation.
Therefore, it is ORDERED as follows:
1.

The Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 59), filed June 7, 2011, is ADOPTED and
CONFIRMED and made part of this Order.

2.

Defendant Rubin & Debski’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint
(Doc. No. 21) is GRANTED. The claims brought against Defendant Rubin & Debski,
P.A., in Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint are DISMISSED without prejudice.
Plaintiff may file an amended complaint no later than fourteen days after the date of
this Order.

3.

Defendant, Rubin & Debski, P.A., Motion for Sanctions Against Plaintiff (Doc. No.
24) is DENIED.

DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Jacksonville, Florida on June 28 , 2011.

2

Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record

3