Pal v. United States Navy

• Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
• Decided: April 20, 2021
• Docket: 8:21-cv-00568
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

LESLIE PAL,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No: 8:21-cv-568-KKM-SPF

UNITED STATES NAVY, et al.,

Defendants. / ORDER This matter is before the Court on consideration of the United States Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 4), filed on April 2, 2021, recommending that Plaintiff Marie Miller’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2) be denied. All parties were furnished copies of the Report and Recommendation and were afforded the opportunity to file objections under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). No objections were filed. Considering the record and the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation; DENIES Plaintiff’s motion; and DISMISSES the case WITH PREJUDICE. After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). If a party files a timely and specific objection to a finding of fact by the magistrate judge, the district court must conduct a de novo review with respect to that factual issue. Stokes v. Singletary, 952 F.2d 1567, 1576 (11th Cir. 1992). The district court 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); Ashworth v. Glades Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs, 379 F. Supp. 3d 1244, 1246 (M.D. Fla. 2019).

In the absence of any objection and after reviewing all legal conclusions de novo, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation. The report recommends that Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis be denied because Plaintiff’s complaint lacks sufficient facts to even infer a cognizable federal cause of action and is without

“an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). The Court agrees that Plaintiff’s allegations are strange and clearly without merit. Plaintiff’s complaint contains many bizarre allegations involving special forces, the

Royal family, and brain surgeries. (Doc. 1). Additionally, the Court agrees that given Plaintiff’s history of filing similar complaints across the country, Plaintiff could not state a nonfrivolous claim even if given leave to amend her complaint. Gary v. U.S. Gov’t, 540

F. App’x 916, 917 (11th Cir. 2013) (affirming dismissal of a complaint without leave to amend where the “allegations were irrational and wholly incredible”). Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: (1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 4) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED and is made a part of this Order for all purposes, including appellate review. (2) PlaintifPs Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2) is DENIED. (3) Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice. (4) Plaintiff's Motion to Require Contempt of Court Money Owed (Doc. 3) is DENIED as moot. (5) The Clerk is directed to terminate all pending motions and close the case. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on April 20, 2021.

fethry Maglle Kathryn Kiccball Mirella United States District Judge