Thomas Burgess v. Deputy William Rothman

S.D. Florida

Thomas Burgess v. Deputy William Rothman

District Court, S.D. Florida·Decided January 30, 2026·No. 9:25-cv-80494·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 25-80494-CIV-SMITH

THOMAS BURGESS,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEPUTY WILLIAM ROTHMAN,

Defendant. ______________________________________/

ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court upon the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation [DE 53] on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [DE 47] and Plaintiff’s Objections [DE 57]. In his thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Reinhart recommends that this case be DISMISSED with prejudice because the Plaintiff has had three opportunities to advance a complaint that states a plausible claim for relief, and he has failed to do so. Furthermore, any amendment would be futile, as the facts Plaintiff alleges cannot support a claim for any kind of constitutional violation. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objections are made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). The Court, having considered Judge Reinhart’s Report, Plaintiff's objections thereto, and having conducted a de novo review of the record, agrees with Judge Reinhart’s well-reasoned analysis and his recommendation that this case be dismissed with prejudice. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation to District Judge [DE 53] is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED and incorporated by reference into this Court’s Order. 2. Th Second Amended Complaint [DE 46] is DISMISSED with prejudice. 3. All pending motions not otherwise ruled upon are DENIED as moot. 4. This case is CLOSED. DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida on this 30th day of January 2026.

RODNEY SMITH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ce: counsel of record

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 25-80494-CIV-SMITH

THOMAS BURGESS,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEPUTY WILLIAM ROTHMAN,

Defendant. ______________________________________/

ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court upon the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation [DE 53] on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [DE 47] and Plaintiff’s Objections [DE 57]. In his thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Reinhart recommends that this case be DISMISSED with prejudice because the Plaintiff has had three opportunities to advance a complaint that states a plausible claim for relief, and he has failed to do so. Furthermore, any amendment would be futile, as the facts Plaintiff alleges cannot support a claim for any kind of constitutional violation. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objections are made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). The Court, having considered Judge Reinhart’s Report, Plaintiff's objections thereto, and having conducted a de novo review of the record, agrees with Judge Reinhart’s well-reasoned analysis and his recommendation that this case be dismissed with prejudice. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation to District Judge [DE 53] is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED and incorporated by reference into this Court’s Order. 2. Th Second Amended Complaint [DE 46] is DISMISSED with prejudice. 3. All pending motions not otherwise ruled upon are DENIED as moot. 4. This case is CLOSED. DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida on this 30th day of January 2026.

RODNEY SMITH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ce: counsel of record

Thomas Burgess v. Deputy William Rothman, (S.D. Fla. 2026).

Pincite

Thomas Burgess v. Deputy William Rothman (Thomas Burgess v. Deputy William Rothman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related