Opinion
CV 121-079
06-03-2022
JONATHAN HAMILTON, Plaintiff, v. PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON, et. al., Defendant.
ORDER
J. RANDAL HALL, CHIEF JUDGE.
After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which objections have been filed. (Doc. no. 36.) In addition to filing objections, Plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time to serve Defendants and a second motion to amend his complaint. (Doc. nos. 31, 32.) Although leave to amend under Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a) is generally given freely, Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962), leave is not guaranteed, and a trial court may deny such leave “in the exercise of its inherent power to manage the conduct of litigation before it.” Reese v. Herbert, 527 F.3d 1253, 1263 (11th Cir. 2008). “In making this determination, a court should consider whether there has been undue delay in filing, bad faith or dilatory motives, prejudice to the opposing parties, and the futility of the amendment.” Saewitz v. Lexington Ins. Co., 133 Fed.Appx. 695, 699 (11th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (quoting Foman, 371 U.S. at 182).
Plaintiff fails to show good cause for extending the period of service or granting leave of Court to amend the complaint for a second time. Thus, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs motions for an extension of time to serve Defendants and to file a second amended complaint. (Doc. nos. 31, 32.) Accordingly, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiffs objections, ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as its opinion, DISMISSES this case without prejudice, and CLOSES this civil action. Plaintiffs motion to expedite the case and his second motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, are therefore DENIED AS MOOT. (Doc. nos. 27, 15.)
SO ORDERED.