THE SHAPING ACADEMY FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH DEVELOPMENT, INC., A FLORIDA PROFIT CORPORATION
v.
AETNA BEHAVIORAL HEALTH LLC, A FOREIGN LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Shaping Academy sought preliminary injunctive relief and temporary restraining order against Aetna Behavioral Health LLC. The district court, adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation without objection, denied the preliminary injunction motion, granted defendant's motion to compel arbitration, and stayed the case pending arbitration.
The court denied Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, granted Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration, and stayed the case pending arbitration. The court found that arbitration was the appropriate forum for resolving the parties' dispute.
[1] A district court reviews for clear error portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which no specific objection is made.
[2] A motion to compel arbitration may be granted when no party objects to the magistrate judge's recommendation to grant the motion.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).”
Establishes the standard of review for magistrate judge recommendations
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Shaping Academy for Behavioral Health Development, Inc., a Florida profit corporation, filed suit against Aetna Behavioral Health LLC, a foreign l…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion For Preliminary Injunction cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Omnibus Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Detra Shaw-Wilder (the “Report”), [ECF No. 43], on Plaintiff's Emergency Motion for Temporary Injunctive Relief and Temporary Preliminary Injunction (“Motion for Preliminary Injunction"), [ECF No. 1-5], and Defendant Aetna Behavioral Health LLC's ("Defendant") Motion to Compel Arbitration, [ECF No. 6]. On November 14, 2025, Judge Shaw- Wilder issued her Report recommending that Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction be denied, Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration be granted, and that the case be stayed pending arbitration. [ECF No. 43]. Neither party objected to the Report.
A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The objected portions of the report and recommendation are accorded de novo review if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F. 3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection is made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App'x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). As neither party objected to the Report, the Court reviewed it for clear error. Finding no clear error, the Court agrees with Judge Shaw-Wilder's well-reasoned analysis and conclusions.
CONCLUSION
Therefore, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
(1) The Omnibus Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 43], is ADOPTED in full. (2) Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, [ECF No. 1-5], is DENIED. (3) Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration, [ECF No. 6], is GRANTED. (4) The case shall be STAYED and CLOSED pending arbitration. The parties shall notify the Court of the arbitration's outcome within 30 days of its conclusion.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 5th day of December 2025.
DARRIN P. GAYLES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353 (11th Cir. 2009)
- Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. Westpoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 2001 WL 1850837 (M.D. Fla. 2001)