MOBLEY
v.
FLORIDA PSYCHOLOGICAL 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.
The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to dismiss the action without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Plaintiff filed objections to a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation which recommended dismissal of the action without prejudice. The Court re…
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 cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 6; Report) entered by the Honorable Patricia D. Barksdale, United States Magistrate Judge, on May 10, 2023. In the Report, Judge Barksdale recommends dismissing this action without prejudice and terminating all pending motions. See Report at 4. On June 13, 2023, Plaintiff filed objections to the Report. See Plaintiff’s Objection (Doc. 8; Objections). Thus, this matter is ripe for review. The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Pursuant to Rule 72, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Rule(s)), the Court “must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.” See Rule 72(b)(3); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, a party waives the right to challenge on appeal any unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. R. 3-1.1 As such, the Court reviews those portions of the Magistrate Judge’s findings to which no objection was filed for plain error and only if necessary, in the interests of justice. See id.; see also 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.”); Dupree v. Warden, 715 F. 3d 1295, 1304-05 (11th Cir. 2013) (recommending the adoption of what would become
11th Circuit Rule 3-1 so that district courts do not have “to spend significant amounts of time and resources reviewing every issue—whether objected to or not.”). Upon independent review of the file, the undersigned concludes that
Judge Barksdale correctly determines that Plaintiff has failed to establish a basis for this Court to exercise subject matter jurisdiction over this action. Thus, the Court will overrule the Objections and accept and adopt the legal and factual conclusions recommended by the Magistrate Judge.
3. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice.
4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment, terminate any pending motions, and close this case. DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida, this 14th day of June, 2023.
United States District Judge ja Copies to: Counsel of Record Pro Se Parties
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (U.S. 1985)
- Dupree v. Warden, Attorney Gen., State of Ala., 715 F.3d 1295 (11th Cir. 2013)