The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 25-CV-81016-WPD
JORGE A. ZEA,
Plaintiff,
v.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
REALTORS, et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________________/
ORDER ADOPTING AND APPROVING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF
MAGISTRATE JUDGE; GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendants National Association of REALTORS®;
Broward, Palm Beaches and St. Lucie REALTORS®, Inc.; Beaches MLS, Inc.; Miami
Association of REALTORS®, Inc.; Orlando Regional REALTOR® Association, Inc.; Space
Coast Multiple Listing Service, Inc.; Space Coast Association of REALTORS®, Inc.; Royal
Palm Coast REALTOR® Association, Inc.; Florida Gulf Coast Multiple Listing Service, Inc.;
Naples Area Board of REALTORS®, Inc.; My Florida Regional MLS, Inc. (d/b/a Stellar MLS);
Northeast Florida Multiple Listing Service, Inc. (d/b/a realMLS); Northeast Florida Association
of REALTORS®, Inc.; Central Panhandle Association of REALTORS®, Inc.; Connecticut
Association of REALTORS®; Smart MLS, Inc.; and West and Southeast REALTORS® of the
Valley, Inc.’s (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (“Motion”)
[DE 59]; and the March 24, 2026 Report and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge William
Matthewman (the “Report”) [DE 84]. The Court notes that no objections to the Report [DE 84]
have been filed, and the time for filing such objections has passed. As no timely objections were
filed, the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings in the Report [DE 84] are hereby adopted and
deemed incorporated into this opinion. LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 745, 749-50 (11th Cir.
1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 958 (1988); RTC v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144, 1149
(11th Cir. 1993).
Although no timely objections were filed, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the
Report [DE 84] and record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court agrees with
the Magistrate Judge’s analysis and conclusions.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The Report [DE 84] is hereby ADOPTED and APPROVED;
2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint [DE 59] is hereby GRANTED;
3. The Complaint is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;
4. Plaintiff is permitted one additional opportunity to file an amended complaint on or
before April 27, 2026 if he has a good-faith basis to do so and in full compliance with
the above law. In the absence thereof, the Court will close the case.
5. Plaintiff is hereby ADMONISHED over his improper use of artificial intelligence
and concomitant misrepresentations to the Court. Plaintiff is hereby ON NOTICE
that more severe sanctions may be imposed if such behavior continues.
6. The Clerk shall email a copy of this order to Plaintiff.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida,
this 13 day of April, 2026.
LLIAM P. DIMITROULEAS
United States District Judge
Copies furnished to:
Counsel of record
Magistrate Judge Matthewman
Jorge A. Zea at email: antitrust@jorgezea.com