In Metropolitan Dade County v. Hall, 784 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. 2001), the Supreme Court considered a case involving nonrecord discovery items and an unfiled offer of judgment. It found that this activity was sufficient under the second step described in Duca v. Anthony, 587 So. 2d 1306 (Fla. 1991). However, in so ruling, the court stated that its analysis in Del Duca was not for use in the first step, but rather in the second step. 784 So. 2d at 1090. As to the first step, the Court stated: Rule 1.420(e) plainly states that actions "shall" be dismissed if it appears on the face of the record that there was no activity within the past year. This requires only a review of the record. There is either activity on the face of the record or there is not.