Al-Rabat Morocco Empire Kingdom Islamic Sovereignty Nation 37-1880026 v. U.S. Supreme Court Nine Justices
Al-Rabat Morocco Empire Kingdom Islamic Sovereignty Nation 37-1880026 v. U.S. Supreme Court Nine Justices
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case No.: 1:20-cv-23439-GAYLES/REID
AL-RABAT MOROCCO EMPRE KINGDOM ISLAMIC SOVEREIGNTY NATION 37-1880026 and XYZ INDIGENOUS ABORIGINAL 28,000 B.C. NATIVES AMERICAN CITIZENS,
Plaintiffs,
v.
U.S. SUPREME COURT NINE JUSTICES,
Defendant. ______________________________________/
ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid’s Report of Magistrate Judge (the “Report”) [ECF No. 3]. On August 19, 2020, Plaintiff Drelijah Muhammad-Ali filed this pro se pleading, appearing to raise a class action. [ECF No. 1]. That same day, the action was referred to Judge Reid, pursuant to Administrative Order 2019-2, for a ruling on all pretrial, non-dispositive matters and for a Report and Recommendation on any dispositive matters. [ECF No. 2]. On August 26, 2020, Judge Reid issued her Report, recommending that the case be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction when construed as a petition brought under
28 U.S.C. § 2241and dismissed as a three-striker pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) when construed as a complaint brought under
42 U.S.C. § 1983. [ECF No. 3]. Plaintiffs filed timely objections. [ECF No. 5]. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz,
565 F.3d 1353, 1360(11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection is made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C.,
199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276(M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc.,
208 F. App’x 781, 784(11th Cir. 2006). Having conducted a de novo review of the record, the Court agrees with Judge Reid’s well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that the case should be dismissed. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that: (1) Judge Reid’s Report [ECF No. 3] shall be AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by reference; (2) The case shall be DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction when construed as a petition brought under
28 U.S.C. § 2241and DISMISSED as a three-striker pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) when construed as a complaint brought under
42 U.S.C. § 1983; and (3) The case shall be CLOSED. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 4th day of September, 2020.
DL DL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Reference
- Status
- Unknown