UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

VERNON JEWEL PEARSON, III,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 8:22-cv-1638-WFJ-JSS

ANDREW WARREN,

Defendant. _____________________________________/

ORDER This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 2) and the complaint (Dkt. 1). The magistrate judge issued a report recommending in forma pauperis status be denied without prejudice and the complaint be dismissed without prejudice to refiling. Dkt. 3. The time for filing objections has passed. The Court reviews the legal conclusions de novo in the absence of an objection. See LeCroy v. McNeil,

, 556 (11th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted); Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co.,

(11th Cir. 1994). The magistrate judge, in a thorough analysis, found that the complaint (Dkt. 1) does not satisfy basic pleading requirements in both form and factual allegations. For the reasons explained in the Report and Recommendation, and in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court concludes that the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 3) should be adopted as part of this Order, confirmed, and approved in all respects. Accordingly, the Court rules as follows:

1. The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 3) is adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects and made a part of this order. 2. Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 2) is denied without

prejudice. 3. Plaintiff’s complaint (Dkt. 1) is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint, if so desired, in accordance with the Report and Recommendation within twenty (20) days. If an amended complaint is not timely

filed, this matter will be closed without further notice. DONE AND ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on August 31, 2022. s/William F. Jung WILLIAM F. JUNG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

COPIES FURNISHED TO: Plaintiff, pro se