Opinion
8:23-cv-1717-WFJ-CPT
01-30-2024
LOURDES BARBOSA, Plaintiff, v. AMAZON AIR KLAK, RUSSELL WHITFIELD, JAMIE HAN, and JESS HAMMOND, Defendants.
ORDER
WILLIAM F. JUNG, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 2) and the complaint (Dkt. 1). The magistrate judge issued a report recommending that ruling on the motion be denied without prejudice and that the complaint be dismissed with leave to file an amended complaint. Dkt. 5. The time for filing objections has passed.
The Court reviews the legal conclusions de novo in the absence of an objection. See LeCroy v. McNeil, 397 Fed.Appx. 554, 556 (11th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted); Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994). The magistrate judge, in a thorough analysis, found that the complaint (Dkt. 1) does not satisfy basic pleading requirements in both form and factual allegations. For the reasons explained in the Report and Recommendation, and in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court rules as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 5) is adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects and made a part of this order.
2. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 2) is denied without prejudice.
3. Plaintiff's complaint (Dkt. 1) is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint, if so desired, in accordance with the Report and Recommendation within thirty (30) days. If an amended complaint that adequately pleads one or more cognizable causes of action over which the Court has jurisdiction is not timely filed, this matter will be closed without further notice.