Prince v. IDES et al

Filing 14

ORDER Adopting 12 Report and Recommendations. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice as to Defendants IDES, Trinity, Chelsea Doe, and Terry Doe. Signed by Judge Rodolfo A. Ruiz, II on 7/13/2021. See attached document for full details. (as03)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 21-CIV-60575-RAR
INGRID PRINCE,
Plaintiff,
v.
IDES, et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________/
ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon United States Magistrate Judge Jared M.
Strauss’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 12] (“Report”), filed on June 23, 2021.

The

Report recommends that this action be dismissed without prejudice as to Defendants IDES, Trinity,
Chelsea Doe, and Terry Doe because Plaintiff failed to perfect service on those defendants.
Report at 3-4.

See

The Report properly notified the parties of their right to object to Magistrate Judge

Strauss’s findings and the consequences for failing to object. Id. at 4.

The time for objections

has passed and neither party filed any objections to the Report.
When a magistrate judge’s “disposition” has properly been objected to, district courts must
review the disposition de novo.

FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). However, when no party has timely

objected, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in
order to accept the recommendation.”

FED. R. CIV. P. 72 advisory committee’s notes (citation

omitted). Although Rule 72 itself is silent on the standard of review, the Supreme Court has
acknowledged Congress’s intent was to only require a de novo review where objections have been
properly filed, not when neither party objects. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (“It

does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate [judge]’s
factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to
those findings.”).
Because no party has filed an objection to the Report, the Court did not conduct a de novo
review of Magistrate Judge Strauss’s findings. Rather, the Court reviewed the Report for clear
error.

Finding none, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1.

The Report [ECF No. 12] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED.

2.

This action is DISMISSED without prejudice as to Defendants IDES, Trinity,

Chelsea Doe, and Terry Doe.
DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 13th day of July, 2021.

_________________________________
RODOLFO A. RUIZ II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2