This matter is before the Court on consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #8), filed December 19, 2011, recommending that the Affidavit of Indigency (Doc. #3), construed as a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, be denied and the case dismissed for failure to prosecute. No objections have been filed and the time to do so has expired.
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983). In the absence of 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. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff'd, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994) (Table).
After conducting an independent examination of the file and upon due consideration of the Report and Recommendation, the Court accepts the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge.
Accordingly, it is now ORDERED:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. #8) is hereby adopted.
2. The Affidavit of Indigency (Doc. #3), construed as a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, is denied.
3. The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing the case without prejudice, terminate all deadlines, and close the file.
Hon. Douglas N. Frazier United States Magistrate Judge Unrepresented parties
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw ...