Hoover v. Central Intelligence Agency

Filing 50

ORDER adopting 49 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; granting 42 MOTION to dismiss Amended Complaint; dismissing Amended Complaint with prejudice as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(b); directing the Clerk to close the file. Signed by Judge John Antoon II on 6/19/2013. (BRS)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION GREGORY LOUIS HOOVER, Plaintiff, -vs- Case No. 6:11-cv-1459-Orl-28DAB CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, Defendant. ________________________________________ ORDER This case is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 42) filed December 5, 2012. The United States Magistrate Judge has submitted a report recommending that the motion be granted. After an independent de novo review of the record in this matter, and noting that no objections were timely filed, the Court agrees entirely with the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Report and Recommendation. Therefore, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. That the Report and Recommendation filed May 23, 2013 (Doc. No. 49) is ADOPTED and CONFIRMED and made a part of this Order. 2. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 42) is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 39) is DISMISSED with prejudice as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(b). Defendant’s Alternative Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 42) is DENIED as moot. 3. The Court certifies that any appeal from this Order finding Plaintiff’s allegations to be frivolous would not be taken in good faith pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). 4. All pending motions are DENIED as moot. 5. The Clerk is directed to close this file. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, Orlando, Florida this 19th day of June, 2013. Copies furnished to: United States Magistrate Judge Counsel of Record Unrepresented Party -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?