Sookov v. Abia

Filing 35

ORDER Adopting 34 Report and Recommendations. Closing Case. Motions Terminated: 34 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS on 42 USC 1983 case re 1 Complaint 42 USC 1983 or Bivens filed by James M. Sookov, Jr. Recommending that the instant actio n be dismissed for lack of prosecution.. Signed by Judge Darrin P. Gayles (hs01) NOTICE: If there are sealed documents in this case, they may be unsealed after 1 year or as directed by Court Order, unless they have been designated to be permanently sealed. See Local Rule 5.4 and Administrative Order 2014-69.

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 15-21183-CIV-GAYLES/WHITE JAMES M. SOOKOV, JR., Plaintiff, v. DR. I. ABIA, Defendant. / ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Patrick A. White’s Report on Dismissal [] For Lack of Prosecution (“Report”) [ECF No. 3]. On March 26, 2015, Plaintiff James M. Sookov, Jr. (“Plaintiff”) filed a pro se Complaint against Defendant Dr. I. Abia (“Defendant”) [ECF No. 1]. The matter was referred to Judge White, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Administrative Order 2003-19 of this Court, for a ruling on all pretrial, non-dispositive matters, and for a Report and Recommendation on any dispositive matters. [ECF No. 3]. Following Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s scheduling order, Judge White issued his Report recommending that the Court dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint for lack of prosecution. Plaintiff has failed to timely object to the Report. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection is made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). This Court finds no clear error with Judge White’s well-reasoned analysis and agrees that this action should be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Accordingly, after careful consideration, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: (1) Judge White’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 3] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference; (2) Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED for lack of prosecution; and (3) this case is CLOSED. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 26th day of April, 2017. ________________________________ DARRIN P. GAYLES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?