Rizvi v. Bolden

United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

Rizvi v. Bolden

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

CASE NO. 21-80086-CIV-CANNON

NUSRAT RIZVI and EILEEN RIZVI,

Plaintiffs, v.

VICTOR A. BOLDEN, et al.,

Defendants. _______________________________/ ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Complaint [ECF No. 1], filed on January 15, 2021. The Complaint was previously referred to Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart for a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) on all dispositive matters [ECF No. 40]. On June 2, 2021, Magistrate Judge Reinhart issued an R&R recommending that the case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute [ECF No. 47]. The R&R notified the parties that any objections had to be filed within fourteen days of the entry of the R&R [ECF No. 47 p. 5]. On June 16, 2021, Defendant Hinckley, Allen & Snyder, LLP filed a Partial Objection to the R&R, arguing that Plaintiff’s complaint should be dismissed with prejudice rather than without prejudice because Plaintiffs have engaged in what they describe as a pattern of “clear failure to prosecute, willful delay, and failure to follow Court Orders” [ECF No. 53 p. 2; see ECF No. 53 (providing additional background in support of Plaintiffs’ failure to prosecute similar cases based on same operative facts)]. Plaintiff has not filed objections or sought additional time in which to do so. The Court has conducted a de novo review of the R&R and the record in this case and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. See Williams v. McNeil,

557 F.3d 1287, 1291

(11th Cir. CASE NO. 21-80086-CIV-CANNON

2009) (citing

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)). Upon review, the Court finds the R&R to be well reasoned and correct. The Court also has reviewed the record and agrees with Defendant Hinckley, Allen & Snyder, LLP that dismissal with prejudice is warranted for the reasons stated in the Partial Objection [ECF No. 53]. Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The R&R [ECF No. 40] is ADOPTED with the additional clarification that the Complaint is dismissed with prejudice as opposed to without prejudice; 2. The Complaint [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; 3. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT; and 4. The Clerk shall CLOSE this case. DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Pierce, Florida this 17th day of June 2021.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ce: counsel of record

Reference

Status
Unknown