Watkins v. Conn's Appliances, Inc.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

ASHIA WATKINS,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 8:24-cv-2380-TPB-LSG

CONN’S APPLIANCES, INC.,

Defendant. / ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION This matter is before the Court on the report and recommendation of Lindsay S. Griffin, United States Magistrate Judge. (Doc. 3). Judge Griffin recommends the Court deny Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) and dismiss the case as frivolous, without leave to amend. Plaintiff Ashia Watkins filed an objection to the report and recommendation. (Doc. 4). 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); 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 Griffin’s very well- reasoned report and recommendation, the Court adopts the report and recommendation in full. The Court agrees that the complaint is frivolous, and it notes that Plaintiff’s filings have been replete with “the legal-sounding but meaningless verbiage commonly used by adherents to the so-called sovereign citizen movement.” See Sealey v. Branch Banking and Trust Co., No.: 2:17cv785-MHT- SMD, 2019 WL 1434065, at *2 (M.D. Ala. Feb. 21, 2019). The arguments and legal

theories espoused by sovereign citizens have been consistently rejected as “utterly frivolous, patently ludicrous, and a waste of . . . the court’s time, which is being paid by hard-earned tax dollars.” See Young v. PNC Bank, N.A., No. 3:16cv298/RV/EMT, 2018 WL 1251920, at *2 (N.D. Fla. Mar. 12, 2018) (citing Roach v. Arrisi, No. 8:15- cv-2547-T-33AEP, 2016 WL 8943290, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 7, 2016)). The objection provides no basis to overrule the report and recommendation.

Because the Court is dismissing this case without leave to amend, it denies as moot Plaintiff’s request for CM/ECF access. See (Doc. 4). Accordingly, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: 1. Judge Griffin’s report and recommendation (Doc. 3) 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 case is DISMISSED, without leave to amend. 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 10th day of February, 2025.

TOM BARBER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 3 of 3