Opinion
Case No. 3:09-cv-1229-J-34MCR.
May 10, 2011
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 49; Report), entered by the Honorable Monte C. Richardson, United States Magistrate Judge, on April 19, 2011. In the Report, Magistrate Judge Richardson recommends that Defendant's Motion to Abate/Stay Pending Resolution of Criminal Case (Dkt. No. 34) be denied without prejudice. See Report at 5. None of the parties have filed objections to the Report, and the time for doing so has now passed.
The Court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). If no specific objections to findings of facts are filed, the district court is not required to conduct a de novo review of those findings. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n. 9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, the district court must review legal conclusions de novo. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); United States v. Rice, No. 2:07-mc-8-FtM-29SPC, 2007 WL 1428615, at * 1 (M.D. Fla. May 14, 2007).
Upon independent review of the file and for the reasons stated in the Magistrate Judge's Report, the Court will accept and adopt the legal and factual conclusions recommended by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED:
1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 49) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
2. Defendant's Motion to Abate/Stay Pending Resolution of Criminal Case (Dkt. No. 49) is DENIED without prejudice. DONE AND ORDERED at Jacksonville, Florida.