Summary
dismissing an action against Life Care under the first-to-file bar, even though Life Care had not been sued in the prior action, when "Life Care is mentioned no less than twelve times in the first nine pages" of the first-filed complaint
Summary of this case from United States v. Medco Health Sols., Inc.Opinion
Case No. 8:06-cv-467-T-33MAP.
November 10, 2008
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court upon consideration of Magistrate Judge Mark A. Pizzo's report and recommendation (Doc. # 100), filed on October 7, 2008, recommending that defendant Life Care Diagnostics' second motion to dismiss the relator's first amended complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (Doc. # 94) be granted. No objections have been filed and the time to do so has expired.
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); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n. 9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff'd, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994).
The Court has conducted an independent examination of the file and upon due consideration of the report and recommendation, the Court accepts the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge.
On June 25, 2008, the Court dismissed the claims against defendants Lincare Holdings, Inc. and Lincare, Inc. for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Doc. # 91.) Therefore, this dismissal of claims against defendant Life Care Diagnostics brings this case to an end.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: ADOPTED, CONFIRMED, APPROVED GRANTED.
(1) The report and recommendation (Doc. # 100) is and in all respects and is made a part of this Order for all purposes, including appellate review. (2) Defendant Life Care Diagnostics' second motion to dismiss the relator's first amended complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (Doc. # 94) is (3) The clerk is directed to terminate all pending motions and deadlines, to close this case. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida.