Opinion
Case No. 8:14-cv-3239-T-23AEP
02-20-2015
cc: Hon. Steven D. Merryday Plaintiffs, pro se
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This cause came before the Court upon Plaintiffs' Complaint (Doc. 1) and Affidavits of Indigency (Docs. 2, 3), which the undersigned construed as motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Upon review of the Complaint, the undersigned noted several deficiencies and therefore denied without prejudice Plaintiffs' requests to proceed in forma pauperis. In addition, Plaintiffs received an opportunity to file an amended complaint to correct the noted deficiencies and were put on notice that failure to file an amended complaint on or before February 16, 2015, would result in a recommendation of dismissal (Doc. 4). As the record indicates, Plaintiffs failed to file an amended complaint within the allotted time. Accordingly, it is hereby
RECOMMENDED:
1. Plaintiffs' Complaint (Doc. 1) be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
2. The Clerk be directed to close the case.
IT IS SO REPORTED in Tampa, Florida, this 20th day of February, 2015.
/s/_________
ANTHONY E. PORCELLI
United States Magistrate Judge
NOTICE TO PARTIES
Failure to file and serve written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations contained in this report within fourteen (14) days from the date it is served on the parties shall bar an aggrieved party from a de novo determination by the District Court of issues covered in the report, and shall bar the party from attacking on appeal factual findings in the report accepted or adopted on appeal by the District Court except upon grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); M.D. Fla. R. 6.02; Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1982) (en banc). cc: Hon. Steven D. Merryday
Plaintiffs, pro se