ALS Living Trust v. Navy Federal Credit Union

• Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
• Decided: October 7, 2025
• Docket: 6:25-cv-01743
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

ALS LIVING TRUST,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No: 6:25-cv-1743-JSS-LHP

NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION,

Defendant. ___________________________________/ ORDER Plaintiff, ALS Living Trust, which purports to proceed pro se through non- attorney Antonia La’niyah Smith, sues Defendant, Navy Federal Credit Union, related to a lien, (Dkt. 1), and moves to proceed in forma pauperis, (Dkt. 2). The magistrate judge assigned to this case recommends denying the motion and dismissing the complaint without prejudice. (Dkt. 4.) The magistrate judge also recommends permitting ALS Living Trust to submit an amended complaint, provided that ALS Living Trust secures counsel to file the pleading on its behalf and pays the filing fee with submission of the pleading. (Id.) No party has filed objections to the recommendation, and the time to do so has passed. Upon consideration, the court adopts the recommendation, denies the motion, and dismisses the complaint without prejudice. Plaintiff may replead in accordance with the recommendation. After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations made by a magistrate judge, a district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); accord Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. A party must serve and file written objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation within fourteen days of being served with a copy of it, 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), and the failure to object in a timely fashion “waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court’s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions,” 11th Cir. R. 3-1. With respect to dispositive matters, the district judge must conduct a de novo review of any portion of the recommendation to which a timely objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); United States

v. Farias-Gonzalez, 556 F.3d 1181, 1184 n.1 (11th Cir. 2009) (“A district court makes a de novo determination of those portions of a magistrate’s report to which objections are filed.”). Even in the absence of a specific objection, the district judge reviews any legal conclusions de novo. Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir.

1994); Ashworth v. Glades Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs, 379 F. Supp. 3d 1244, 1246 (M.D. Fla. 2019). Here, upon conducting a careful and complete review of the magistrate judge’s recommendation and giving de novo review to matters of law, the court agrees with the recommendation in full.

Accordingly: 1. The magistrate judge’s recommendation (Dkt. 4) is ADOPTED. 2. The motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 2) is DENIED. 3. The complaint (Dkt. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. 4. On or before November 14, 2025, ALS Living Trust may file an amended complaint, provided that ALS Living Trust secures counsel to file the amended complaint on its behalf and pays the filing fee with submission of the amended complaint. ORDERED in Orlando, Florida, on October 7, 2025.

Ae Le JUFIE S. SNEED UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies furnished to: Unrepresented Parties

-3-