Lindberg v. Utsler et al

Filing 33

It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the R&R (Doc. 32) is ADOPTED, CONFIRMED, and made a part of this Order in its entirety. Plaintiff's Motion (Doc. 27) is DENIED. Plaintiff's appeal is not taken in good faith. The Clerk is DIRECTED to notify the Eleventh Circuit of this Order in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(4). Signed by Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr. on 5/22/2023. (ALL)

Case 6:21-cv-01544-RBD-DCI Document 33 Filed 05/22/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID 558

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
LENA MARIE LINDBERG,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 6:21-cv-1544-RBD-DCI

MICHAEL UTSLER; MICHAEL
BERNARD; ROBERT WAYNE IVEY;
KEVIN ROBERTS; UNKNOWN #1;
and UNKNOWN #2,
Defendants.
____________________________________
ORDER
Plaintiff filed a pro se Complaint against Defendants. (Doc. 1.) Over a year
after the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint, she moved to appeal in forma
pauperis (“IFP”). (Doc. 24; Doc. 27 (“Motion”).) On referral, U.S. Magistrate Judge
Daniel C. Irick recommends the Court deny the Motion because the appeal is not
taken in good faith. (Doc. 32 (“R&R”).) The time has passed and there were no
objections, so the Court examines the R&R for clear error only. See Macort v. Prem,
Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). Finding none, the R&R is due to be
adopted in its entirety.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1.

The R&R (Doc. 32) is ADOPTED, CONFIRMED, and made a part of

Case 6:21-cv-01544-RBD-DCI Document 33 Filed 05/22/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID 559

this Order in its entirety.
2.

Plaintiff’s Motion (Doc. 27) is DENIED. Plaintiff’s appeal is not taken
in good faith.

3.

The Clerk is DIRECTED to notify the Eleventh Circuit of this Order
in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(4).

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on May 22, 2023.

2