Macleod v. Bexley

Filing 16

ORDER overruling 15 Plaintiff's Objections; adopting 14 Report and Recommendation; denying 4 Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs; denying as moot the remaining pending motions. This case is dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the case. Signed by Judge Marcia Morales Howard on 2/23/2017. (JW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

ROBERT CRAIG MACLEOD,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 3:16-cv-1058-J-34JRK

TOM BEXLEY, in his personal capacity
as a government official (Deputy Court
Clerk, Flagler County, Florida),
Defendant.

ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 14;
Report), entered by the Honorable James R. Klindt, United States Magistrate Judge, on
January 31, 2017. In the Report, Judge Klindt recommends that Plaintiff’s Application to
Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long Form) (Dkt. No. 4) and
the Affidavit of Indigency (Dkt. No. 5), which the Court collectively construes as a Motion
to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, be denied, this action be dismissed without prejudice, and
all remaining motions be denied as moot. See Report at 8. On February 22, 2017,
Plaintiff filed objections to the Report. See Objections to Report and Recommendation
(Dkt. No. 15; Objections).
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 Judge Klindt’s
Report, the Court will overrule the Objections, and accept and adopt the legal and factual
conclusions recommended by the Magistrate Judge.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED:
1.

Plaintiff’s Objections to Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 15) are

OVERRULED.
2.

The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 14) is

ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
3.

Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or

Costs (Long Form) (Dkt. No. 4) and the Affidavit of Indigency (Dkt. No. 5), which the Court
collectively construes as a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, is DENIED.
4.

This case is DISMISSED without prejudice.

5.

The remaining pending motions (Dkt. Nos. 7 and 8) are DENIED as moot.

6.

The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate all deadlines and motions

as moot, and close the case.
DONE AND ORDERED at Jacksonville, Florida, this 23rd day of February, 2017.

-2-

ja
Copies to:
The Honorable James R. Klindt
United States Magistrate Judge
Pro se Party

-3-