Copeland v. Department of Housing and Urban Development et al

Filing 15

ORDER adopting 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Complaint filed by Karen Margaret Copeland. Signed by Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr. on 7/23/2018. (ctp)(JLC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
KAREN MARGARET COPELAND,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 6:18-cv-873-Orl-37DCI

DEPARTMENET OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT; SUZETTE M.
WILSON; LEE GONZALEZ; and
JAMES BERROCAL.
Defendants.
_____________________________________
ORDER
Plaintiff Karen Margaret Copeland (“Copeland”) initiated this action against the
Defendants on June 4, 2018. (See Doc. 1 (“Complaint”).) On June 6, 2018, U.S. Magistrate
Judge Daniel C. Irick ordered Copeland to either pay the filing fee in full or file a motion
to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 4 (“IFP Order”).) Copeland failed to comply with the
IFP Order. Thus, Judge Irick issued a Report and Recommendation that the Court dismiss
the Complaint without prejudice for failure to comply with the IFP Order. (Doc. 11
(“R&R”).) Following the issuance of the R&R, Copeland filed an Amended Complaint as
well as two Motions for Miscellaneous Relief on July 19, 2018. (See Doc. 12–14.) However,
Copeland has still yet to comply with the IFP Order.
The parties did not object to the R&R, and the time for doing so has now passed.
As such, the Court has examined the R&R only for clear error. See Wiand v. Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A., No. 8:12-cv-557-T-27EAJ, 2016 WL 355490, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 28, 2016); see
-1-

also Marcort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). Finding no error, the
Court concludes that the R&R is due to be adopted in its entirety.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Daniel C. Irick’s Report and Recommendation (Doc.
11) is ADOPTED, CONFIRMED, and made a part of this Order.

2.

Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

3.

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. 12) is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.

4.

Plaintiff’s Motions for Miscellaneous Relief for Order on Civil Action (Doc.
13) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

5.

Plaintiff’s Motions for Miscellaneous Relief for Order on Civil Action to
Continue Residing at Crossland of Orlando (Doc. 14) is DISMISSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

6.

On or before Friday, August 3, 2018, Plaintiff may file an amended
complaint consistent with the strictures of this Order, along with a motion
to proceed in forma pauperis or payment of the filing fee. Failure to file an
amended complaint within this time period will result in dismissal of this
case without further notice.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on July 23, 2018.

-2-

Copies to:
Counsel of Record
Pro Se Party

-3-