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

CASE NO. 23-80637-CIV-CANNON/Reinhart

RICHARD J. TOWNSEND,

Plaintiff, v.

CITY OF BOCA RATON and ADAM KENISTON,

Defendants. __________________________________/ ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [ECF No. 18]

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (the “Report”) [ECF No. 18], issued on August 14, 2023. On April 18, 2023, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion”) [ECF No. 6]. On August 14, 2023, following referral and a hearing on the Motion, Judge Reinhart issued a Report recommending that the Motion be granted in part and denied in part [ECF No. 18 pp. 1, 27–28]. Objections to the Report were due on August 23, 2023 [ECF No. 18 p. 28]. Both parties filed notices indicating no intent to object to the Report [ECF Nos. 19, 20]. 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,

(11th Cir. 1989); Macort v. Prem, Inc.,

(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.

(b)(1). To the extent a party does not object to parts of the magistrate judge’s CASE NO. 23-80637-CIV-CANNON/Reinhart

report, the Court may accept the recommendation so long as there is no clear error on the face of the record. Macort,

. Upon review of the Report, the Court finds no clear error on the face of the record. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 18] is ACCEPTED. 2. The Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint [ECF No. 6] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. 3. Counts I, II, and [V may proceed. 4. Counts III and V are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 5. Count VI is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 6. On or before September 11, 2023, Plaintiff shall either (1) file an Amended Complaint for the limited purpose of repleading Count III and/or Count V one final time; or (2) file a Notice indicating his intention to proceed on Counts J, II, and [V alone. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida this 28th day of August 2023. AILEEN M. CANNON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ce: counsel of record