MARASCO
v.
TAYLOR SWIFT PRODUCTIONS, INC.
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 Court accepts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting the motion to dismiss.
Plaintiff filed a complaint, and Defendant moved to dismiss. The Magistrate Judge recommended granting the motion and dismissing the complaint without…
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 Objections To Magistrate Judge'S Findings cases and more on FLexlaw
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [ECF No. 20]
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Magistrate Judge Maynard's Report and Recommendation on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (the “Report”) [ECF No. 20], issued on July 26, 2024. On May 22, 2024, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion”) [ECF No. 10]. Following referral, Judge Maynard issued a Report recommending that the Motion be granted; that the Complaint be dismissed in its entirety without prejudice; and that Plaintiff be afforded an opportunity to amend her claims consistent with pleading requirements and the essential elements of her claims [ECF No. 20 p. 9]. Both parties have filed notices indicating no objection to the Report [ECF Nos. 21, 22].
To challenge the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge, a party must file specific written objections identifying the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection is made. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); Heath v. Jones, 863 F. 2d 815, 822 (11th Cir. 1989); Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). A district court reviews de novo 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.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). To the extent a party fails to object to parts of the magistrate judge's report, the Court may accept the recommendation so long as there is no clear error on the face of the record. Macort, 208 F. App’x at 784. Legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See LeCroy v. McNeil, 397 F. App’x 554, 556 (11th Cir. 2010); Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).
Following review, the Court finds no error of fact or law, clear or otherwise, in the wellreasoned Report. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 20] is ACCEPTED. 2. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 10] is GRANTED. 3. Plaintiff's Complaint [ECF No. 1-1] is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 4. Plaintiff shall have one final opportunity to replead her claims by filing an Amended Complaint, but any such amended complaint must be filed on or before August 23, 2024, and rectify the deficiencies identified in the Report and fully comply with the instructions in the Report and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 5. Failure to file a timely amended pleading in accordance with this Order and with the Report will result in dismissal of this case without further notice.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida this 2nd day of August 2024.
AILEEN M. CANNON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
cc: counsel of record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Marina Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603 (11th Cir. 1994)
- Heath v. Jones, 863 F.2d 815 (11th Cir. 1989)