# Perry v. Greider

> District Court, M.D. Florida · February 25, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10806171

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, M.D. Florida
- **Decided:** February 25, 2025
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10806171

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION

KENDRICK TYRON PERRY, SR.,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 2:24-cv-938-SPC-KCD

JUDGE CHRISTINE GREIDER,
JUDGE MARGARET O.
STEINBECK, THOMAS WILD
GUTHRIE, AND MICHAEL
BROWN,

Defendants.
/
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Kyle C. Dudek’s Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”). (Doc. 6). Judge Dudek recommends that the Court
dismiss this action without prejudice because Plaintiff has not diligently
prosecuted this case by ignoring the Court’s order to file an amended
complaint. Plaintiff has not objected to the R&R, and the time to do so has
expired. The R&R is ripe for review.
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and
recommendations, a district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or
in part,” a magistrate judge’s R&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). In the absence
of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review the
R&R de novo. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1998).
Instead, when parties don’t object, a district court need only correct plain error

as demanded by the interests of justice. See, e.g., Symonette v. V.A. Leasing
Corp., 648 F. App’x 787, 790 (11th Cir. 2016); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140,
150-52 (1985). Plain error exists if (1) “an error occurred”; (2) “the error was
plain”; (8) “it affected substantial rights”; and (4) “not correcting the error
would seriously affect the fairness of the judicial proceedings.” Farley v.
Nationwide Mut. Ins., 197 F.3d 13822, 1329 (11th Cir. 1999).
After careful consideration and an independent review of the case, the
Court finds no plain error. So, it accepts and adopts the R&R in full.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1. Judge Dudek’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 6) is ACCEPTED
and ADOPTED, and the findings incorporated herein.
2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice.
3. The Clerk is DIRECTED to deny any pending motions as moot,
terminate any deadlines, and close the case.
DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on February 25, 2025.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies: All Parties of Record

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10806171. Public record. Not legal advice.