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

GERARD J. PUGH,

Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO.: 4:19-cv-252

v.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY MEG HEAP,

Defendant.

O RDER After a careful de novo review of the entire record, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's May 27, 2021, Report and Recommendation, (doc. 24), to which plaintiff has filed an objection, (doc. 25). The Magistrate Judge recommended that the case be dismissed for plaintiff’s failure to timely serve the defendant and his failure to comply with the Court’s Order to amend his Complaint. (Doc. 24 at 3–4). For the following reasons, the objections are overruled, and the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation as the opinion of this Court. Plaintiff’s objection, to the extent that it addresses the substance of the Report and Recommendation, takes issue with the Court’s “ask[ing] all these dump question [sic] concerning policy and rules . . . .” (Doc. 25 at 2.) Plaintiff objects that the Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal for his failure to comply with procedural rules, despite also denying his request for appointed counsel. (See generally, id.) Despite plaintiff’s dissatisfaction, the Magistrate Judge correctly determined both that Plaintiff was not entitled to appointed counsel in a civil case, (see doc. 7 at 1–2 (citing, inter alia., Fowler v. Jones,

(11th Cir. 1990))), and that he was obligated to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, notwithstanding his pro se status, see, e.g.. Wells v. Royal Caribbean Int'l Cruises, Ltd, □□□ App’x —_,

, at * 2 (11th Cir. July 20, 2021) (“[P]ro se litigants are bound by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.” (citation omitted))). Pugh does not dispute the Magistrate Judge’s analysis that he failed to serve defendant, as required under Federal Rule 4, or that he failed to comply with the Court’s prior order to file an Amended Complaint. Therefore, plaintiff's objections, (doc. 25), are overruled and the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation as the opinion of this Court. Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED. All pending motions in this case are DISMISSED as moot. (Docs. 18, 20, 23 & 24). The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close this case. SO ORDERED, this 1st day of September, 2021. f S ee Lye R.STANBAKER s—‘i—sCS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA