Jorge A. Zea v. National Association of Realtors, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: 25-CV-81016-WPD JORGE A. ZEA, Plaintiff, v. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, et al., Defendants. ___________________________________/ ORDER ADOPTING AND APPROVING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE; GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendants National Association of REALTORS®; Broward, Palm Beaches and St. Lucie REALTORS®, Inc.; Beaches MLS, Inc.; Miami Association of REALTORS®, Inc.; Orlando Regional REALTOR® Association, Inc.; Space Coast Multiple Listing Service, Inc.; Space Coast Association of REALTORS®, Inc.; Royal Palm Coast REALTOR® Association, Inc.; Florida Gulf Coast Multiple Listing Service, Inc.; Naples Area Board of REALTORS®, Inc.; My Florida Regional MLS, Inc. (d/b/a Stellar MLS); Northeast Florida Multiple Listing Service, Inc. (d/b/a realMLS); Northeast Florida Association of REALTORS®, Inc.; Central Panhandle Association of REALTORS®, Inc.; Connecticut Association of REALTORS®; Smart MLS, Inc.; and West and Southeast REALTORS® of the Valley, Inc.’s (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (“Motion”) [DE 59]; and the March 24, 2026 Report and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge William Matthewman (the “Report”) [DE 84]. The Court notes that no objections to the Report [DE 84] have been filed, and the time for filing such objections has passed. As no timely objections were filed, the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings in the Report [DE 84] are hereby adopted and deemed incorporated into this opinion. LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 745, 749-50 (11th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 958 (1988); RTC v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993).

Although no timely objections were filed, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the Report [DE 84] and record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s analysis and conclusions.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The Report [DE 84] is hereby ADOPTED and APPROVED; 2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint [DE 59] is hereby GRANTED; 3. The Complaint is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; 4. Plaintiff is permitted one additional opportunity to file an amended complaint on or before April 27, 2026 if he has a good-faith basis to do so and in full compliance with the above law. In the absence thereof, the Court will close the case.

5. Plaintiff is hereby ADMONISHED over his improper use of artificial intelligence and concomitant misrepresentations to the Court. Plaintiff is hereby ON NOTICE that more severe sanctions may be imposed if such behavior continues.

6. The Clerk shall email a copy of this order to Plaintiff.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this 13 day of April, 2026.

LLIAM P. DIMITROULEAS United States District Judge Copies furnished to: Counsel of record Magistrate Judge Matthewman Jorge A. Zea at email: [email protected]