JAIME R. GOMEZ, M.D. v. CONVIVA PHYSICIAN GROUP, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 2:25-cv-14359-LEIBOWITZ/MAYNARD JAIME R. GOMEZ, M.D., Plaintiff, v. CONVIVA PHYSICIAN GROUP, LLC, Defendant. ___________________________________/ ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge Shaniek Mills Maynard [ECF No. 34] (the “R&R”), filed on January 30, 2026. In the R&R, Judge Maynard recommends dismissing Plaintiff’s amended complaint in its entirety without prejudice with leave to file a second amended complaint. [Id. at 19]. The parties each filed notices of non-objection to the R&R. [See ECF Nos. 35, 37]. Accordingly, upon due consideration of the R&R, the parties’ filings, the applicable law, and the record, the Court ADOPTS and AFFIRMS the Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 34].

“In order to challenge the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge, a party must file written objections which shall specifically identify the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection is made and the specific basis for objection.” Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 783 (11th Cir. 2006) (cleaned up). The objections must also present “supporting legal authority.” S.D. Fla. L. Mag. J.R. 4(b). Once a district court receives “objections meeting the specificity requirement set out above,” it must “make a de novo determination of 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.” Macort, 208 F. App’x at 783–84 (cleaned up). To the extent a party fails to object to parts of the magistrate judge’s report, those portions are reviewed for clear error. Id. at 784 (cleaned up).

The parties have not submitted any objections to Judge Maynard’s R&R, and the time to do so has passed. As such, the Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error only. Upon this review, the Court finds not only no clear error but also notes that Judge Maynard’s R&R is thorough, cogent, and compelling. ‘The Court adopts the R&R in its entirety.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 34| is ADOPTED AND AFFIRMED and made a part of this Order for all purposes.

2. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 13] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as recommended by Judge Maynard.

2. Plaintiffs Amended Complaint [ECF No. 9] is DISMISSED without prejudice.

3. Plaintiff must file a Second Amended Complaint no later than February 24, 2026, failing which this case will be DISMISSED without further notice.

DONE AND ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on February 17, 2026. ea os UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE cc: counsel of record