CHARMAINE FLOYD
v.
BOBBY ISLEX
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The District Court for the Southern District of Florida adopted a magistrate judge's report and recommendation dismissing plaintiff Charmaine Floyd's complaint without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The court found no clear error in the magistrate's determination and noted the report was thorough and compelling.
The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation in its entirety, finding no clear error and dismissing the complaint without prejudice due to plaintiff's failure to pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis.
[1] A party must file written objections that specifically identify the portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which objection is made and the specific…
[2] Objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation must present supporting legal authority.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“In order to challenge the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge, a party must file written objections which shall specifically identify the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection is made and the specific basis for objection.”
Establishes the standard and requirements for objecting to a magistrate judge's report
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Charmaine Floyd filed a complaint pro se but failed to pay the required filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis. A …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Failure To Pay Filing Fee cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Marty Fulgueira Elfenbein [ECF No. 4] (the “R&R”), filed on January 6, 2026. Judge Elfenbein recommends dismissing Plaintiff's Complaint without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis. No objections to the R&R were filed during the 14-day objection period. Upon due consideration of the R&R, the filings, the applicable law, and the record, the Court ADOPTS and AFFIRMS the R&R [ECF No. 4].
“In order to challenge the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge, a party must file written objections which shall specifically identify the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection is made and the specific basis for objection.” Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App'x 781, 783 (11th Cir. 2006) (cleaned up). The objections must also present “supporting legal authority.” S.D. Fla. L. Mag. J.R. 4(b). Once a district court receives “objections meeting the specificity requirement set out above,” it must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report to which objection is made and may accept, reject, or modify in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” Macort, 208 F. App’x at 783–84 (cleaned up). To
the extent a party fails to object to parts of the magistrate judge's report, those portions are reviewed for clear error. Id. at 784 (cleaned up).
The parties have not submitted any objections to Judge Elfenbein's R&R, and the time to do so has passed. As such, the Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error only. Upon this review, the Court finds not only no clear error but also notes that Judge Elfenbein's R&R is thorough, cogent, and compelling. The Court adopts the R&R in its entirety.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 4] is ADOPTED and made a part of this Order for all purposes.
2. Plaintiff's Complaint [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED without prejudice.
3. The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this Order to Plaintiff.
4. The Clerk is further directed to CLOSE this case. Any pending motions are DENIED as moot, and all deadlines are TERMINATED.
DONE AND ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on January 21, 2026.
DAVID S. LEIBOWITZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
cc: counsel of record Charmaine Floyd 1243 N.W. 100 Terrence Miami, FL 33147 PRO SE