GOODALL

v.

AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of Defendant American Express Company’s Motion to Compel Arbitration, (Dkt. 17), the Response in opposition thereto filed by Plaintiff Rebbecca Goodall, (Dkt. 23), and Defendant’s Reply. (Dkt. 27) On August 26, 2019, United States Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that: (1) Defendant American Express National Bank’s Motion to Compel Arbitration (Doc. 17) be granted; (2) The parties be directed to submit to arbitration and to file periodic reports with the court on the status of arbitration; (3) The case be stayed pending the arbitration process; and (4) The Clerk of Court be directed to stay and administratively close the case pending the completion arbitration. (Dkt. 36 at 23) Plaintiff has not filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation and the deadline for doing so has passed. After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F. 2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983). A district judge “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). This requires that the district judge “give fresh consideration to those issues to which specific objection has been made by a party.” Jeffrey S. v. State Bd. of Educ., 896 F. 2d 507, 512 (11th Cir.1990) (quoting H.R. 1609, 94th Cong. § 2 (1976)). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F. 2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).

Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation, in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court is of the opinion that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects. Furthermore, upon de novo review of the file, the Court finds that the matter is due to be referred to arbitration, and that a stay of the case is appropriate pending such arbitration proceedings. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. 36), is CONFIRMED and ADOPTED as part of this Order; 2. Defendant American Express Company’s Motion to Compel Arbitration, (Dkt. 17), is GRANTED; 3. The Parties shall submit to arbitration and file a Joint Status Report on or before the fifteenth (15th) day of each month regarding the status of arbitration; and 4. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to STAY and ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE the case pending the completion of arbitration. DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 11th day of September, 2019. Th ey | 4

MARYS. SORIVEN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Any Unrepresented Person