Filed: Mar. 19, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 19, 2019
Summary: ORDER DARRIN P. GAYLES , District Judge . THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendants' Motion, by Order to Show Cause, for Sanctions and Other Relief Against Plaintiff ("Motion for Sanctions") [ECF No. 430] 1 and Defendant, Maximiliano Poveda's Joinder in Motion, by Order to Show Cause, for Sanctions and Other Relief Against Plaintiff. The action was referred to Magistrate Judge Alicia Otazo-Reyes, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B), for a ruling on all pretrial, non-dispositive ma
Summary: ORDER DARRIN P. GAYLES , District Judge . THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendants' Motion, by Order to Show Cause, for Sanctions and Other Relief Against Plaintiff ("Motion for Sanctions") [ECF No. 430] 1 and Defendant, Maximiliano Poveda's Joinder in Motion, by Order to Show Cause, for Sanctions and Other Relief Against Plaintiff. The action was referred to Magistrate Judge Alicia Otazo-Reyes, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B), for a ruling on all pretrial, non-dispositive mat..
More
ORDER
DARRIN P. GAYLES, District Judge.
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendants' Motion, by Order to Show Cause, for Sanctions and Other Relief Against Plaintiff ("Motion for Sanctions") [ECF No. 430]1 and Defendant, Maximiliano Poveda's Joinder in Motion, by Order to Show Cause, for Sanctions and Other Relief Against Plaintiff. The action was referred to Magistrate Judge Alicia Otazo-Reyes, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), for a ruling on all pretrial, non-dispositive matters, and for a Report and Recommendation on any dispositive matters. [ECF No. 220]. On July 6, 2018, and Jan-uary 25, 2019, Judge Otazo-Reyes held show cause hearings. On February 11, 2019, Judge Otazo-Reyes issued her report recommending that the Court grant the Motion for Sanctions (the "Re-port") [ECF No. 670]. Plaintiff has timely objected to the Report [ECF No. 675].2
A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommen-dation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made 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).
The Court has conducted a de novo review of the record and the law and agrees with the Report's recommendations. Accordingly, after careful consideration, it is ORDERED AND AD-JUDGED as follows:
(1) Judge Otazo-Reyes's Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 670] is ADOPTED;
(2) Defendants' Motion, by Order to Show Cause, for Sanctions and Other Relief [ECF No. 430] is GRANTED in PART. Sanctions, in the form of attorney's fees and costs, shall be imposed against Plaintiff;
(3) Within 60 days of the date of this Order, Defendants shall file their request for reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in connection with their preparation for the cancelled depositions of Dr. Cabeza and Mr. Pedroza and the litigation of the Motion for Sanctions in accordance with Local Rule 7.3.
DONE AND ORDERED.
