RAFAEL BELTRE v. HRB TAX GROUP, INC., et al.

• Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
• Decided: December 29, 2025
• Docket: 8:25-cv-02223
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

RAFAEL BELTRE,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 8:25-cv-2223-TPB-AAS

HRB TAX GROUP, INC., et al.,

Defendants. /

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on the “Report and Recommendation” of United States Magistrate Judge Amanda Arnold Sansone, entered on October 30, 2025. (Doc. 15). In her well-reasoned report, Judge Sansone recommends that Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) be denied and that the action be dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff filed an objection on November 19, 2025. (Doc. 19). 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); Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982). A district court must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which an objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). When no objection is filed, a court reviews the report and recommendation for clear error. Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006); Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404, 409 (5th Cir. 1982). After careful consideration of the record, including Judge Sansone’s well- reasoned report and recommendation, the Court adopts the report and recommendation. The Court agrees with Judge Sansone’s findings and legal conclusions, and Plaintiff's objection does not provide a basis for overruling the report and recommendation. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: 1. Judge Sansone’s “Report and Recommendation” (Doc. 15) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED and INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE into this Order for all purposes, including appellate review. 2. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is DENIED. 3. This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 4. The Clerk is directed to terminate any pending motions and deadlines and thereafter close this case. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 29th day of December, 2025.

TOMBARBER i si ss—SsC UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2