ORDER

CARLOS E. MENDOZA, District Judge.

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Airborne Insurance Consultants (PTY), Ltd's ("Airborne") Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Doc. 34); Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint (Doc. 51); and Plaintiff's Motion to File Reply to Response to Motion to Amend and to Strike Affidavit Improperly Filed with Reply and/or to File Supplemental Affidavit (Doc. 61). United States Magistrate Judge David A. Baker issued a report recommending that the Motion to Amend be granted and the Motion to Dismiss and Motion to File Reply be denied as moot. (Doc. 65). This cause is also before the Court on Airborne's Motion to Strike Amended Complaint or in the Alternative Motion for Extension of Time to Respond (Doc. 69); and Clyde & Co., LLP's ("Clyde") Motion for Leave to File a Reply to The Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Clyde's Motion to Dismiss, Quash (Doc. 81).

After an independent de novo review of the record in this matter, the Court agrees entirely with the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Report and Recommendation. In granting Plaintiff's Motion to Amend, the Court accepts the Amended Complaint (Doc. 67) as filed. Plaintiff's Motion to File a Reply (Doc. 61) and Airborne's Motion to Strike the Amended Complaint (Doc. 69) are moot.

Furthermore, the Court has determined that a Reply to Plaintiff's Response to Clyde's Motion to Dismiss will be helpful. Therefore, Clyde's Motion to file such a Reply shall be granted. Once the Court has addressed the jurisdictional issues raised in Clyde's Motion to Dismiss, it will address Plaintiff's motion to modify the Case Management and Scheduling Order (Doc. 80) and re-designate deadlines as appropriate.

Therefore, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:

DONE and ORDERED.