UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

JOSUE JOSEPH,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No: 6:24-cv-1052-JSS-LHP

SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC., BRUCE JACKSON, ERIK LANEY, and CHRIS PFIRRMAN,

Defendants. ___________________________________/ ORDER In September 2024, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed an amended complaint (Dkt. 16) and a renewed motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 17). In January 2025, the magistrate judge assigned to this case issued a recommendation advising that the amended complaint should be dismissed without prejudice, the renewed motion should be denied without prejudice, and Plaintiff should have “a final opportunity to replead.” (Dkt. 25 at 3–4, 12.) No party has filed objections to the recommendation, and the time to do so has passed. Upon consideration, the court adopts the recommendation in full. After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations made by a magistrate judge, a district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations.”

(b)(1); accord Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. A party must serve and file written objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation within fourteen days of being served with a copy of it,

(b)(1)(C), and the failure to object in a timely fashion “waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court’s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal

conclusions,” 11th Cir. R. 3-1. With respect to dispositive matters, the district judge must conduct a de novo review of any portion of the recommendation to which a timely objection is made.

(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); United States v. Farias-Gonzalez,

, 1184 n.1 (11th Cir. 2009) (“A district court makes a de novo determination of those portions of a magistrate’s report to which objections

are filed.”). Even in the absence of a specific objection, the district judge reviews any legal conclusions de novo. Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co.,

(11th Cir. 1994); Ashworth v. Glades Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs,

(M.D. Fla. 2019).

Here, upon conducting a careful and complete review of the magistrate judge’s recommendation and giving de novo review to matters of law, the court agrees with the recommendation in full. Accordingly: 1. The magistrate judge’s recommendation (Dkt. 25) is ADOPTED.

2. Plaintiff’s amended complaint (Dkt. 16) is DISMISSED without prejudice. 3. Plaintiff’s renewed motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 17) is DENIED without prejudice. 4. On or before April 19, 2025, Plaintiff shall file a second amended complaint and a renewed motion to proceed in forma pauperis, if he can do so in good faith. ORDERED in Orlando, Florida, on March 28, 2025. . □□ JULIE S. SNEED UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies furnished to: Unrepresented Parties Counsel of Record

-3-