SEALVER SAS
v.
JETSKIBOAT USA INC.
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 District Court for the Southern District of Florida adopted a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation on a motion for attorney fees, granting the motion in part and denying it in part, awarding defendants $7,449.50 in attorney fees.
The District Court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation in its entirety, granting Defendants' Motion for Attorney Fees in part and denying it in part, awarding defendants $7,449.50 in attorney fees.
[1] A party must file written objections that specifically identify the portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which objection is made and the specific…
[2] Objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation must present supporting legal authority.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“In order to challenge the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge, a party must file written objections which shall specifically identify the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection is made and the specific basis for objection.”
Establishes the standard for challenging magistrate judge recommendations, requiring specific identification and legal authority.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDefendants filed a Motion for Attorney Fees that was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart for resolution. The Magistrate Judge…
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 De Novo Determination cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS MATTER was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart for resolution on Defendants' Motion for Attorney Fees (the “Motion”) [ECF No. 68].[ECF No. 69]. Judge Reinhart has since issued a Report and Recommendation (the “R&R”), recommending that the Motion be granted in part and denied in part. [ECF No. 70]. Defendant filed a notice of nonobjection to Judge Reinhart's R&R. [ECF No. 71]. Plaintiff did not file any objections to the R&R, and the time to do so has passed. After careful review of the filings, the applicable law, and the record, the Court adopts Judge Reinhart's R&R in its entirety.
“In order to challenge the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge, a party must file written objections which shall specifically identify the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection is made and the specific basis for objection.” Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App'x 781, 783 (11th Cir. 2006) (cleaned up). The objections must also present “supporting legal authority.”S.D. Fla. L. Mag. J.R. 4(b). Once a district court receives “objections meeting the specificity requirement set out above,” it must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report to which objection is made and may accept, reject, or modify in whole or in part, the findings
or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” Macort, 208 F. App’x at 783–84 (cleaned up). To the extent a party fails to object to parts of the magistrate judge's report, those portions are reviewed for clear error. Id. at 784 (cleaned up).
The parties have not submitted any objections to Judge Reinhart's R&R, and the time to do so has passed. As such, the Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error only. Upon this review, the Court finds not only no clear error but also notes that Judge Reinhart's R&R is thorough, cogent, and compelling. The Court adopts the R&R in its entirety.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1. Magistrate Judge Reinhart's R&R [ECF No. 70] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. 2. Defendants' Motion for Attorney Fees [ECF No. 68] is GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART.
3. Defendants shall recover attorneys' fees in the amount of $7,449.50.
DONE AND ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on February 13, 2025.
DAVID S. LEIBOWITZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
cc: counsel of record