Lindberg v. Maxwell

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

ORLANDO DIVISION

LENA MARIE LINDBERG,

Plaintiff, v. Case No. 6:21-cv-1587-RBD-GJK GEORGE W. MAXWELL, III;

CHRISTINA MARIE SANCHEZ

SERRANO; GEORGE BRITTON

TURNER, III; WILLIAM DAVID

DUGAN; MICHELLE L.

NABERHAUS; COLLEEN ADKINS

DEGRAFF; SAMUAL

BOOKHARDT, III; and JEFFREY

MAHL,

Defendants. ____________________________________

ORDER

Plaintiff filed a pro se Complaint against Defendants, alleging sexual assault, attempted murder, false imprisonment, fraud, and several other crimes. (Doc. 1.) She also moved to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 2 (“Motion”).) Given Plaintiff’s pattern of filing frivolous documents, the Court previously required all filings by Plaintiff to be reviewed for frivolity. (Doc. 20.) So on referral, U.S. Magistrate Judge Gregory J. Kelly entered a Report and Recommendation submitting that the Court should deny the Motion and dismiss the Complaint with prejudice as unintelligible, frivolous, and noncompliant with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. 21, pp. 2-3 (“R&R”).)

The parties did not object and the deadline has passed, so the Court examines the R&R for clear error only. See Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). Finding none, the R&R is due to be adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The R&R (Doc. 21) is ADOPTED, CONFIRMED, and made a part of this Order in its entirety.

2. Plaintiff's Motion (Doc. 2) is DENIED.

3. The Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

4. The Clerk is DIRECTED to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on November 18, 2021.

{]

United States District Judge Copies to:

Pro se Plaintiff Lena Marie Lindberg