1:26-cv-00097•CLARK v. ROSENTHAL et al
Full text
Page 1 of 2 Case No. 1:26cv97-RH-HTC IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION LUCY CLARK, Plaintiff, v. CASE NO. 1:26cv97-RH-HTC MICHAEL ROSENTHAL et al., Defendants. _____________________________/ ORDER OF DISMISSAL This case is before the court on the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, ECF No. 5. No objections have been filed. More than 14 days have run even since the most recent mailing of the report and recommendation. See ECF No. 8. So even if the 14-day period for objections was deemed to run only from that mailing, the deadline would have passed. Upon consideration, IT IS ORDERED: The report and recommendation is accepted and adopted as the court’s opinion. The clerk must enter judgment stating, “This case is dismissed without Case 1:26-cv-00097-RH-HTC Document 10 Filed 06/25/26 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2 Case No. 1:26cv97-RH-HTC prejudice as malicious under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).” The clerk must close the file. SO ORDERED on June 25, 2026. s/Robert L. Hinkle United States District Judge Case 1:26-cv-00097-RH-HTC Document 10 Filed 06/25/26 Page 2 of 2
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.