Opinion
CV 123-018
05-12-2023
ORDER
On April 11, 2023, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) that dismissed Plaintiffs complaint as a sanction for abuse of the judicial process. (Doc. no. 10.) The Court also instructed Plaintiff any objections to the R&R had to be filed no later than April 28, 2023. (Doc. no. 11.) Having received no objections to the R&R by the deadline, the Court adopted the R&R as its opinion on May 5,2023. (Doc. no. 14.)
On May 8, 2023, the Clerk of Court received Plaintiffs objections to the R&R via mail, which Plaintiff signed April 18,2023. (Doc. no. 16.) Although Plaintiffs objections did not reach the Court by the objection deadline, using Plaintiffs signature date, and granting him the benefit of the “mailbox rule,” the Court accepts the objections. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266,276 (1988) (deeming prisoner document filed on the date of delivery to prison officials for mailing); United States v. Glover, 686 F.3d 1203,1205 (11th Cir. 2012) (“Unless there is evidence to the contrary... we assume that a prisoner's motion was delivered to prison authorities on the day he signed it.”). Thus, the Court VACATES the May 5th Adoption Order. (Doc. no. 14.)
After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's R&R, to which objections have been filed. (Doc. no. 16.) Plaintiff simply states he forgot about his undisclosed cases, which is no excuse. Accordingly, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiffs objections, ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as its opinion, DISMISSES this case without prejudice as a sanction for Plaintiffs abuse of the judicial process, and CLOSES this civil action.
SO ORDERED.