IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA WAYCROSS DIVISION

ANTONETTE RAMON PHILLIPS,

Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO.: 5:19-cv-105

v.

TIMOTHY WARD, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER AND MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Presently before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint. Doc. 11. The Court has conducted its requisite frivolity review and service has been ordered on Defendant Augustin. Doc. 10. In the same Order directing service on Defendant Augustin, the Court directed Plaintiff to identify the Doe Defendants in 60 days. Id. Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint identifies Jane Doe as Nurse Sonja Wright, LPN. Id. Plaintiff also asks the Court to dismiss the remaining Doe Defendants. Id. at 2. The Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion as a matter of right. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a); Toenniges v. Ga. Dep’t of Corr.,

(11th Cir. 2012) (“A plaintiff has a right to amend a complaint once as a matter of course so long as no responsive pleading has been filed.”). The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to add “Nurse Sonja Wright, LPN” as a Defendant upon the record and docket of this case. Furthermore, Plaintiff amends his Complaint to exclude any claim against the remaining Doe Defendants. Doc. 11 at 2. Accordingly, I RECOMMEND the Court DISMISS the remaining Doe Defendants from this case. Any party seeking to object to this Report and Recommendation is instructed to file specific written objections within 14 days of the date on which this Report and Recommendation is entered. See

(b); Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2). Any objections asserting that the Magistrate Judge failed to address any contention raised in the Complaint must also be included. Failure to do so will bar any later challenge or review of the factual findings or legal conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. See

(b)(1)(C); Thomas v. Arn,

(1985). A copy of the objections must be served upon all other parties to the action. The filing of objections is not a proper vehicle through which to make new allegations or present additional evidence. Furthermore, it is not necessary for a party to repeat legal arguments in objections. The parties are advised that failure to timely file objections will result in the waiver of rights on appeal. 11th Cir. R. 3-1; see Symonette v. V.A. Leasing Corp.,

(11th Cir. 2016); Mitchell v. United States,

(11th Cir. 2015). Upon receipt of Objections meeting the specificity requirement set out above, a United States District Judge will make a de novo determination of those portions of the report, proposed findings, or recommendation 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. Objections not meeting the specificity requirement set out above will not be considered by a District Judge. A party may not appeal a Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Appeals may be made only from a final judgment entered by or at the direction of a District Judge. SO ORDERED, this 14th day of May, 2020.

BENJAMIN W. CHEESBRO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA