Ain Jeem, Inc. v. The Individuals, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

AIN JEEM, INC.,

Plaintiff, v. Case No. 8:21-cv-1331-VMC-AEP THE INDIVIDUALS, PARTNERSHIPS AND UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATIONS IDENTIFIED ON SCHEDULE A,

Defendants. _______________________________/ ORDER This matter is before the Court on consideration of United States Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 373), filed on August 3, 2022, recommending that Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Carl Puckett’s Motion for Permission to Appeal In Forma Pauperis and Affidavit (Doc. # 365) be denied. As of the date of this Order, no objections have been filed and the time for filing objections has lapsed. The Court accepts and adopts the Report and Recommendation and denies the Motion. Discussion After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may

accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff’d, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994). After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings, conclusions and recommendations, and giving de novo review to matters of law, the Court accepts the factual findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: (1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 373) is ACCEPTED and

ADOPTED. (2) Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Carl Puckett’s Motion for Permission to Appeal In Forma Pauperis and Affidavit (Doc. # 365) is DENIED. (3) The Court certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith. (4) In accordance with Rule 24(a)(4)(A), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, the Clerk is directed to notify the parties and the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit that Puckett’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 29th day of August, 2022, lanier. Menerby (nigh VIR IA M. HERNANDEZ’COVINGTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE