Rizvi v. Bolden ( 2021 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION CASE NO. 21-80086-CIV-CANNON NUSRAT RIZVI and EILEEN RIZVI, Plaintiffs, v. VICTOR A. BOLDEN, et al., Defendants. _______________________________/ ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Complaint [ECF No. 1], filed on January 15, 2021. The Complaint was previously referred to Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart for a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) on all dispositive matters [ECF No. 40]. On June 2, 2021, Magistrate Judge Reinhart issued an R&R recommending that the case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute [ECF No. 47]. The R&R notified the parties that any objections had to be filed within fourteen days of the entry of the R&R [ECF No. 47 p. 5]. On June 16, 2021, Defendant Hinckley, Allen & Snyder, LLP filed a Partial Objection to the R&R, arguing that Plaintiff’s complaint should be dismissed with prejudice rather than without prejudice because Plaintiffs have engaged in what they describe as a pattern of “clear failure to prosecute, willful delay, and failure to follow Court Orders” [ECF No. 53 p. 2; see ECF No. 53 (providing additional background in support of Plaintiffs’ failure to prosecute similar cases based on same operative facts)]. Plaintiff has not filed objections or sought additional time in which to do so. The Court has conducted a de novo review of the R&R and the record in this case and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. See Williams v. McNeil, 557 F.3d 1287, 1291 (11th Cir. CASE NO. 21-80086-CIV-CANNON 2009) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). Upon review, the Court finds the R&R to be well reasoned and correct. The Court also has reviewed the record and agrees with Defendant Hinckley, Allen & Snyder, LLP that dismissal with prejudice is warranted for the reasons stated in the Partial Objection [ECF No. 53]. Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The R&R [ECF No. 40] is ADOPTED with the additional clarification that the Complaint is dismissed with prejudice as opposed to without prejudice; 2. The Complaint [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; 3. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT; and 4. The Clerk shall CLOSE this case. DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Pierce, Florida this 17th day of June 2021. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ce: counsel of record