Jacqueline Becerra

“Defendants' Motions to Dismiss, ECF Nos. [25], [34], [39], [55], [58], are GRANTED and the Complaint, ECF No. [1], is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. ... Plaintiff may file an amended complaint that complies with the requirements set forth in the Report by July 8, 2024.”

“Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. [99], is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to permit limited jurisdictional discovery to proceed. ... Defendants may file a renewed motion to dismiss according to the established briefing schedule, if they so choose.”

“The Report, ECF No. [68], is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. ... Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. [56], is DENIED.”

“the Court lacks jurisdiction to enforce the Settlement Agreement and Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration is therefore DENIED. ... Defendants' Motion to Compel Arbitration, ECF No. [31], is DENIED.”

“Plaintiff's Motion for Contempt and Request for a Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. [34], is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and Plaintiff may file a renewed motion if the parties have not already resolved their dispute, whether through arbitration or otherwise.”

“Plaintiffs' Expedited Motion to Authorize Alternative Service, ECF No. [24], is GRANTED IN PART AND DEFERRED IN PART as set forth herein.”

“Petitioner Angelo Gallardo Andrade's Verified Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, ECF No. [1], is GRANTED IN PART. The Court has determined that Petitioner falls under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), and accordingly, Respondents shall promptly afford Petitioner an individualized bond hearing consistent with 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) or otherwise release Petitioner.”

“Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Becerra's January 29, 2021 Report and Recommendation (DE 23) be, and the same is, hereby AFFIRMED and ADOPTED as an Order of this Court; ... Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (DE 21) is hereby GRANTED; ... Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (DE 19) is hereby DENIED”

“Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (DE 21) is hereby GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; ... The above-styled action is hereby REMANDED to the Social Security Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this opinion;”

“Borodin's Motion [ECF No. 202] is DENIED.”

“SBSC's, Lifecell's, and Suarez's Joint Motion [ECF No. 204] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: a. GRANTED as to Counts I, II, and III of Defendants'/Counter-Plaintiffs' Second Amended Counterclaim ... b. GRANTED as to Counts I and II of Defendants'/Counter-Plaintiffs' Third-Party Complaint Against Suarez ... and c. DENIED as to Count II of Lifecell and SBSC's Amended Complaint”

“Respondents' Motions to Dismiss, (DEs 87, 108), is hereby DENIED AS MOOT.”

“Defendant City of Miami's Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. [9], is GRANTED and Plaintiff's Complaint, ECF No. [1], is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. If Plaintiff intends to file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies identified in the Report, he must do so no later than March 12, 2025.”

District Judge Jose E. Martinez's order overruling a pro se plaintiff's objections and adopting Magistrate Judge Becerra's Report and Recommendation that a Section 1915(e) in forma pauperis screening complaint be dismissed. An IFP screening dismissal, not an ordinary contested motion to dismiss, so it is excluded from the dispositive-motion count; included here only as background on her magistrate-era screening practice.