McDuffie v. Conmed Corporation

Filing 7

ORDER ADOPTING 6 Report and Recommendation. The Court DENIES 2 Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Signed by Judge Mary S. Scriven on 5/13/2024. (AC)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION ELAINA MCDUFFIE, Plaintiff, v. Case No: 8:24-cv-566-MSS-CPT CONMED CORPORATION, Defendant. ORDER THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs, (Dkt. 2), which the Court construes as a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Also before the Court is Plaintiff’s counseled complaint. (Dkt. 1) On April 23, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Christopher P. Tuite issued a Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. 6), which recommended Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis be denied. The Parties have not objected to Judge Tuite’s Report and Recommendation, and the deadline for doing so has passed. In fact, Plaintiff has now paid the filing fee. Upon consideration of all relevant filings, case law, and being otherwise fully advised, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. In the Eleventh Circuit, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation after conducting a careful and complete 1 review of the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982). A district judge “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). This requires that the district judge “give fresh consideration to those issues to which specific objection has been made by a party.” Jeffrey S. v. State Bd. of Educ., 896 F.2d 507, 512 (11th Cir.1990) (quoting H.R. 1609, 94th Cong. § 2 (1976)). Absent 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. Southern Ry., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994). Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation, in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court is of the opinion the Report and Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. 6), is CONFIRMED and ADOPTED as part of this Order. 2. Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, (Dkt. 2), is DENIED. 2 DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 13th day of May 2024. Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Any Unrepresented Person 3

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?