Opinion
8:24-cv-399-MSS-AAS
04-22-2024
CHRISTINA D. THUNDATHIL, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
MARY S. SCRIVEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of Plaintiff's Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs, (Dkt. 2), which the Court construes as a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Also before the Court is Plaintiff's Complaint. (Dkt. 1) The Court warned Plaintiff that failure to timely file an amended complaint by March 29, 2024 may result in a recommendation of denial of the motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (Dkt. 4) On April 4, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Amanda Arnold Sansone issued a Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. 5) which recommended Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis be denied and the Complaint be dismissed without prejudice. The Parties have not objected to Judge Sansone's Report and Recommendation and the deadline for doing so has passed. Upon consideration of all relevant filings, case law, and being otherwise fully advised, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and DISMISSES the Complaint without prejudice.
In the Eleventh Circuit, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation after conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982). A district judge “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). This requires that the district judge “give fresh consideration to those issues to which specific objection has been made by a party.” Jeffrey S. v. State Bd. of Educ., 896 F.2d 507, 512 (11th Cir.1990) (quoting H.R. 1609, 94th Cong. § 2 (1976)). Absent specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).
Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation, in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court is of the opinion the Report and Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. 5), is CONFIRMED and ADOPTED as part of this Order.
2. Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, (Dkt. 2), is DENIED.
3. The Complaint, (Dkt. 1), is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
4. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE THIS CASE.
DONE and ORDERED.