Rivera v. University of South Florida Office of the General Counsel

Filing 11

ORDER: The report and recommendation 9 is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. Plaintiff's construed motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis 2 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff's construed Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff is granted leave to file an Amended Complaint by June 25, 2012, failing which may result in the dismissal of this action without further notice. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 6/4/2012. (KAK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
JASON M. RIVERA,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 8:12-mc-27-T-33TBM

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA,
OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL,
Defendant.
________________________________/
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on consideration of the
report and recommendation of Thomas B. McCoun III, United
States Magistrate Judge, (Doc. # 9) filed on May 15, 2012,
recommending that Plaintiff’s construed motion to proceed in
forma

pauperis

(Doc.

#

2)

be

denied,

recommending

that

Plaintiff’s construed Complaint (Doc. # 1) be dismissed, and
recommending that Plaintiff be given an opportunity to file an
Amended Complaint in 20 days.
No objections have been filed, and the time for the
submission of objections has expired.
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.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
(1)

The report and recommendation (Doc. # 9) is ACCEPTED and
ADOPTED.

(2)

Plaintiff’s construed motion for leave to proceed in
forma pauperis (Doc. # 2) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

-2-

(3)

Plaintiff’s construed Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.

(4)

Plaintiff is granted leave to file an Amended Complaint
by June 25, 2012, failing which may result in the
dismissal of this action without further notice.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 4th

day of June 2012.

Copies:

All Counsel and Parties of Record

-3-