RODRIGUEZ
v.
NORTHWEST FLORIDA RECEPTION CENTER
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 adopted the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation, dismissing the case as frivolous and for failure to state a claim.
Plaintiff sued defendants under §1983. The magistrate judge recommended dismissal, finding the defendants were private parties and not state actors, 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 De Novo Review Of Magistrate Judge'S Report cases and more on FLexlaw
This case is before the Court based upon the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (R&R) (Doc. 19) and Plaintiff’s objection (Doc. 21).1 The Court reviewed the issues raised in the objection de novo as required by 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), and based on that review, the Court agrees with the magistrate judge’s determination that this case is due to be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii), because it is frivolous and fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Notably, Plaintiff’s objection does not challenge the magistrate judge’s dispositive finding that the named defendants are not subject to suit under §1983 because they are private parties, not state actors. Additionally, the objection does
1. The magistrate judge’s R&R is adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order. 2. This case is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and
(ii) as frivolous and for failure to state a claim.
3. The Clerk shall close the case file.
4. Plaintiff is advised that if he intends to appeal the disposition of this case to the Eleventh Circuit, he will need to file another notice of appeal
within the time limit prescribed by the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Perez-Priego, 148 F. 3d at 1273. DONE and ORDERED this 26th day of May, 2022.