THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 16; Report), entered by the Honorable Joel B. Toomey, United States Magistrate Judge, on October 24, 2011. In the Report, Magistrate Judge Toomey recommends that this action be dismissed without prejudice as to Defendant James M. Christensen pursuant to Rule 4(m), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Report at 2. Plaintiff has failed to file objections to the Report, and the time for doing so has now passed.
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). If no specific objections to findings of fact are filed, the district court is not required to conduct a de novo review of those findings. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, the district court must review legal conclusions de novo. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); United States v. Rice, No. 2:07-mc-8-FtM-29SPC, 2007 WL 1428615 at *1 (M.D. Fla. May 14, 2007).
Upon independent review of the file and for the reasons stated in the Magistrate Judge's Report, the Court will accept and adopt the legal and factual conclusions recommended by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, it is hereby
1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 16) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
2. The claims raised against Defendant James M. Christensen are DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate this Defendant from the Court docket.
ja Copies to: The Honorable Joel B. Toomey United States Magistrate Judge Counsel of Record Pro Se Parties
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw ...