Opinion
Case No. 3:06-cv-1120-J-34JRK.
September 4, 2009
ORDER
This is a "written opinion" under § 205(a)(5) of the E-Government Act and therefore is available electronically. However, it has been entered only to decide the motion addressed herein and is not intended for official publication or to serve as precedent.
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 39; Report), entered by the Honorable James R. Klindt, United States Magistrate Judge, on May 22, 2009. In the Report, Magistrate Judge Klindt recommended that the Court grant Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint, and dismiss this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Report at 14. On June 9, 2009, the Court granted Plaintiff an extension of time in which to file objections to the Report, see Order (Dkt. No. 41), and on June 22, 2009, Plaintiff filed his Specific Objections to Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 42; Objections). After being prompted to do so by the Court, on July 31, 2009, Defendant filed its response to the Objections. See Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Specific Objections to Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 44).
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 facts 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 overrule the Objections, and accept and adopt the legal and factual conclusions recommended by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff's Specific Objections to Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 42) are OVERRULED.
2. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 39) is ADOPTED.
3. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 29) is GRANTED.
4. This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment dismissing the case without prejudice, terminate any pending motions or deadlines as moot, and close this file.
DONE AND ORDERED at Jacksonville, Florida.