Eatman v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Filing 37

ORDER adopting 34 Report and Recommendation; granting 10 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. The Clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 6/14/2011. (CR)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
RICHARD EATMAN,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 8:10-cv-1370-T-33EAJ

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION, in its capacity as
Receiver for Colonial Bank,
Defendant.
______________________________/
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on consideration of
United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Jenkins' Report
and Recommendation (Doc. # 34), entered on May 20, 2011, which
recommends that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's
Complaint for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (Doc. # 10)
be granted.
As of this date, there are no objections to the report
and recommendation, and the time for the parties to file such
objections has elapsed.
After conducting a careful and complete review of the
findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept,
reject

or

modify

the

magistrate

judge’s

report

and

recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright,

681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112
(1983).

In the absence of specific objections, there is no

requirement that a district judge review factual findings de
novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir.
1993), and the court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or
in part, the findings and recommendations.

28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de
novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston
v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro
Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla.
1993), aff’d, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994) (Table).
After conducting a careful and complete review of the
findings, conclusions and recommendations, and giving de novo
review to matters of law, the Court accepts the factual
findings and legal conclusions of the Magistrate Judge and the
recommendation of the Magistrate Judge regarding the motion.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
1.

United States Magistrate Elizabeth A. Jenkins' Report and
Recommendation (Doc. # 34) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED.

2.

Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint for
Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction (Doc. # 10) is
GRANTED.

Plaintiff’s claims are dismissed pursuant to
-2-

Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction.
3.

The Clerk is directed to close this case.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 14th day of

June, 2011.

Copies to:
All Counsel of Record

-3-