GERALD PLUVIOSE
v.
PHH MORTGAGE, RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A district court reviewed a magistrate judge's recommendation and denied the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, finding no plain error in the magistrate's analysis.
The district court found no plain error in the magistrate judge's recommendation and accepted and adopted the R&R in full, thereby denying plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.
[1] A district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation in whole or in part.
[2] In the absence of specific objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, a district court is not required to review the report de novo.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“a district judge "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part," a magistrate judge's report and recommendation”
Establishes the district court's authority to review magistrate judge recommendations under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Gerald Pluviose sought to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal in a mortgage-related case involving PHH Mortgage, Rushmore Loan Management, a…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Magistrate Judge'S Report And Recommendation Review cases and more on FLexlaw
Before the Court is United States Magistrate Judge Douglas N. Frazier's Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 76). [fn 1] Judge Frazier recommends that Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal be denied. No party objected, so the matter is ripe for review.
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part," a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review the report and recommendation de novo. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F. 2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993). Instead, when parties don't object, a district court need only correct plain error as demanded
by the interests of justice. See, e.g., Symonette v. V.A. Leasing Corp., 648 F. App'x 787, 790 (11th Cir. 2016); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150-52 (1985). Plain error exists if (1) “an error occurred”; (2) “the error was plain"; (3) “it affected substantial rights"; and (4) “not correcting the error would seriously affect the fairness of the judicial proceedings.” Farley v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 197 F. 3d 1322, 1329 (11th Cir. 1999).
After careful consideration and an independent review of the case, the Court finds no plain error. It accepts and adopts the R&R in full.
Accordingly, it is now ORDERED:
1. Judge Frazier's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 76) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED, and the findings incorporated herein.
2. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (Doc. 72) is DENIED.
ENTERED in Fort Myers, Florida on November 26, 2025.
Kyle C. Dudek United States District Judge
[fn 1]: Unless otherwise indicated, all internal quotation marks, citations, case history, and alterations have been omitted in this and later citations.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776 (11th Cir. 1993)
- Farley v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 197 F.3d 1322 (11th Cir. 1999)