Monroe v. City of Forest Park, Georgia
Filing
24
OPINION AND ORDER that Magistrate Judge Catherine M. Salinas' Non-Final Report and Recommendation 21 is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant City of Forest Park, Georgia's Motion to Partially Dismiss 4 is DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 11/10/2015. (anc)
Dismiss, seeking dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims under the Rehabilitation Act and
her failure-to-accommodate claim under the ADA.
On June 24, 2015, Plaintiff filed her Amended Complaint [5], which does
not contain any claims under the Rehabilitation Act, or a claim for failure-toaccommodate claim under the ADA. On October 30, 2015, the Magistrate Judge
recommended that the Motion to Partially Dismiss be denied as moot because the
Amended Complaint supersedes the original Complaint. (R&R at 3-4). Defendant
did not file any objections to the R&R.
II.
DISCUSSION
A.
Legal Standard
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and
recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a 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). 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). With respect to those findings and
recommendations to which objections have not been asserted, the Court must
conduct a plain error review of the record. United States v. Slay, 714 F.2d 1093,
2
1095 (11th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1050 (1984). Defendant did not
object to the R&R and the Court thus reviews it for plain error.
B.
Analysis
The Magistrate Judge found that the Amended Complaint supersedes the
original Complaint, rendering the Motion to Partially Dismiss, which sought to
dismiss claims contained in the Complaint, moot. (R&R at 3-4). The Court finds
no plain error in the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendation. See Slay,
714 F.2d at 1095; see also, e.g., Sheppard v. Bank of Am., NA, No. 1:11-CV4472-TWT, 2012 WL 3779106, at *4 (N.D. Ga. Aug. 29, 2012); see also Lowery
v. Ala. Power Co., 483 F.3d 1184, (11th Cir. 2007) (“[A]n amended complaint
supersedes the initial complaint and becomes the operative pleading in the case.”).
III.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Catherine M. Salinas’
Non-Final Report and Recommendation [21] is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant City of Forest Park,
Georgia’s Motion to Partially Dismiss [4] is DENIED AS MOOT.
3
SO ORDERED this 10th day of November, 2015.
_______________________________
WILLIAM S. DUFFEY, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
4
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?